sign in sign up
<<
Home , 13th Lok Sabha, Akhilesh Yadav, Amar Singh (politician), Bahujan Samaj Party, Chandauli district, Janata Party (Secular)

Refugee Review Tribunal AUSTRALIA

RRT RESEARCH RESPONSE

Research Response Number: IND34598 Country: Date: 9 April 2009

Keywords: India – – – Maowadi – Maoist – Naxalite insurgency – State protection

This response was prepared by the Research & Information Services Section of the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the RRT within time constraints. This response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum. This research response may not, under any circumstance, be cited in a decision or any other document. Anyone wishing to use this information may only cite the primary source material contained herein.

Questions

1. Please provide information on the history, aims and structure of the Samajwadi Party. 2. Please provide any relevant information on the Labra Khuna terrorist group (Maowadi group) and the scope of its activities. Does the group operate in Punjab State, Haryana, or states with Sikh communities? 3. Please provide information on the level of police or military protection available to persons threatened by extremist groups in Uttar Pradesh.

RESPONSE

1. Please provide information on the history, aims and structure of the Samajwadi Party.

History, aims and structure of the Samajwadi Party

The Rediff News website provides information relating to the Party’s history, aims and structure. The document was prepared for the 2004 Elections special coverage:

Full name

Samajwadi Party

President Mulayam Singh

Election symbol

Bicycle

A bit of history

The Samajwadi Party was born on October 4, 1992, in the historic Begum Hazrat Mahal Park in , Uttar Pradesh. Party workers elected Mulayam Singh president the same day.

Party philosophy

The Samajwadi Party believes in and opposes the unrestricted entry of multinational companies into India. It stands for equality and prosperity for all. It is dead set against communal forces and favours a confederation of India- Pakistan-Bangladesh.

Who is ? A Socialist, Yadav had been with several parties, including the , and , before forming the Samajwadi [ for Socialist] Party. He has served as the country’s defence minister and recently took over as chief minister of Uttar Pradesh for the third time. The former wrestler is addressed as netaji (leader) by one and all.

Party structure Apart from Yadav, there is vice-president and eight general secretaries, including the powerful . The office-bearers are elected for a three-year term.

How is the party run? Yadav’s standing ensures that he is in overall command. There is no challenger in sight. His wish is the Samajwadi Party’s command.

Is it a regional party? Yes, based in Uttar Pradesh. Yadav derives a lot of his importance from the fact that the state elects the most number of MPs to the Lok Sabha.

Does it enjoy popular support outside UP? The party has put up candidates in , , Gujarat and some other places in the past, but has met with marginal success at best. But in this era of hung assemblies, every seat counts and the Samajwadi Party’s capacity to damage the prospects of other parties makes it a formidable presence in all these states. For example, the candidate in the high-profile South parliamentary constituency lost by a little over 10,000 votes in 1999 while the Samajwadi candidate polled 19,000 odd votes.

SP’s strength It enjoys the support of the Yadav community. Its avowed objective of battling communal forces and Yadav’s determination to defeat them has won it a large Muslim following as well, especially in Uttar Pradesh. The Samajwadi Party is also wooing Thakurs in a big way through general secretary Amar Singh. SP’s weakness The party does not have a second rung of leadership. Also, its staunch opposition to ’s has stopped the Samajwadi Party from joining any anti-BJP alliance in Uttar Pradesh. On the other hand, its efforts to gain a stranglehold on the state’ s politics has resulted in it going soft of late on the BJP, whose perceived communal outlook it ostensibly despises. Naturally, Opposition parties have started questioning its secular credentials.

Future challenges The Samajwadi Party can bank upon the , but has now to compete with the BSP and Congress for the support of Muslims and Thakurs. Secondly, Yadav has got promises from leading industrialists to invest in Uttar Pradesh and create jobs; but none of them has borne fruit as yet. Poor law and order and the investor-unfriendly attitude of the bureaucracy are major deterrents. Yadav has to convince the electorate to give him enough time to convince his friends to keep their promises.

Political prospects The growth of regional parties coupled with the caste factor, especially in Uttar Pradesh, has made the Samajwadi Party a force to reckon with. In this era of coalition politics, a repeat or improvement of its performance in the 1999 election (it had 26 MPs in the ) will ensure a major role in the constitution of the next government at the Centre (Shankar Sahay, Tara ‘Know the Samajwadi Party’ 2004, Rediff News, May 7 http://in.rediff.com/election/2004/may/07espec2.htm – Accessed 9 March 2006 – Attachment 1).

The official Samajwadi Party website contains some more detailed information about the Party’s political activities since 2000:

Samajwadi Party () is a political party in India. It describes itself as a democratic socialist party. It was founded on October 4, 1992. It is one of several parties that emerged when the Janata Dal (People’ s Party), India’s primary opposition party prior to the BJP, was fragmented into several regional parties. Samajwadi Party is led by Mulayam Singh Yadav, the former Chief Minister of the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh.

Samajwadi Party is primarily based in Uttar Pradesh, where it bases its support largely on OBCs (Other Backward Castes) and Muslims, particularly Mulayam Singh Yadav’ s own Yadav caste. It has made strong attempts to gain national status, by contesting Lok Sabha and state Assembly elections around the country, but it has been unsuccessful thus far. In last assembly election in Madhya Pradesh in 2003, Samajwadi Party did significant and gained 7 seats which took it as a third largest party in the state. By winning the bye-election of Lanji (Balaghat) in 2007, its total tally reached to 8.

In the , it currently has 38 members, and is the fourth largest party in that house, its best ever tally. Besides 36 members from Uttar Pradesh, it won one seat from Uttranchal (formerly part of U.P.). In 2005, former Karnataka Chief Minister Bangarappa resigned from the BJP to join the Samajwadi Party. He successfully held on to his Lok Sabha seat from Shimoga under a new party ticket.

At present, the Samajwadi Party’s main ally is the , a small party which is supporting its government in Uttar Pradesh. The Congress is also providing vital support to that government, and likewise, the Samajwadi Party is providing outside support to the minority government at the Centre. Despite this, there is deep-seated public enmity between the two parties. This was evident during the March 2006 political fall-out which followed the expulsion of Samajwadi Party parliamentarian on grounds of holding an "office of profit." SP leaders blamed the move on the Congress high-command, and tensions have increased since then, although neither has revoked its support.

The S.P. try to maintain equal distance to Congress and Bhartiya Janta Party. But its main rival in Uttar Pradesh is BSP (Bahujan Samaj Party) who has emerged as a major political force in the state. The installation of Mulayam Singh Yadav’s government in 2003 was widely-perceived to be the result of such a friendly agreement. Given their drastically different vote-bank’s, they never publicly align.

In the recently conducted 2007 Uttar Pradesh legislative elections, the S.P won only 96 seats as opposed to 146 in the previous elections. As a result, Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav had to resign, with his bete noir Mayawati, leader of the Bahujan Samaj party (which won a majority of 207 seats) being sworn in as the Chief Minister.

Samajwadi Party is spreading its roots to the south too. S.Bangarappa (Former Chief Minister of Karnataka) has taken up the leadership in the south with the support of Jagdeesh Yadav in and P.M.Harris a known left – socialist leader of Kerala (‘About the Party’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/party.html – Accessed 27 March 2009 – Attachment 2).

The Party website provides short biographies of the main leaders: Mulayam Singh Yadav (President), Janeshwar Misrah (Position not stated), Amar Singh (General Secretary), (General Secretary), (Patron Yuvjan Sabha (youth wing)) (‘Leaders’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/leaders.html – Accessed 27 March 2009 – Attachment 3).

The site also lists the members of the Party in the 2 houses of the current national parliament (‘Party in Parliament – ’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/rajyasabha.html – Accessed 27 March 2009 – Attachment 4), (‘Party in Parliament – Lok Sabha’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/loksabha.html – Accessed 27 March 2009 – Attachment 5).

A research paper entitled A political introduction to India, published on 2 May 2007 by the UK House of Commons Library contains some similar information. The paper suggests that the Samajwadi and Bahujan Samaj Party are “bitter rivals:

Samajwadi Party [36 seats][Researcher’ s Note: This refers to the number of seats held in the 14th Lok Sabha]

The Samajwadi (Socialist) Party was formed in 1991 by another break-away faction from the Janata Party. Despite efforts to broaden its support, the party is primarily based in Uttar Pradesh. It bases its support largely on Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Muslims. It was a supporter of the UPA Government between 2004 and February 2007,when it withdrew its support. President: Mulayam Singh Yadav. (Harrison, T., Jones, S., Lunn, J., Smith, B., Taylor, C., & Youngs, T. 2007, A political introduction to India, UK Parliament Website, International Affairs and Defence Section – House of Commons Library, May 2, http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007-041.pdf – Accessed 11 October 2007 – Attachment 6).

The Freedom Network website (Christian charity advocating the abolition of the caste system and rights for the Dalit caste) contains the following information on the Party:

SP or Socialist Party…describes itself as a democratic socialist and anti-English language party. SP is led by Mulayam Singh Yadav, the former Chief Minister of UP. It is primarily based in Uttar Pradesh, where it bases its support largely on OBCs (Other Backward Castes) and Muslims, particularly Mulayam Singh Yadav’s own Yadav caste. The S.P. has been also known to be friendly with the BJP, mostly because their primary enemy is common: Sister Mayawati, a Dalit and leader of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), who has emerged as a major political force in the state and was elected on 11 May 2007 as the new Chief Minister of UP (‘Definitions’ (undated) Dalit Freedom Network website, http://www.dalitnetwork.org/go?/dfn/about/C20/#gujjar – Accessed 6 September 2007 – Attachment 7).

It further states, regarding the Party’s relationship with the Bahujan Samaj Party:

The deep and mutual hostility between the BSP and the Samajwadi Party … the other leading state party in Uttar Pradesh, whose support is mainly obtained from the OBC or classes … has led the BSP into allying itself many times with its erstwhile ideological enemies, the BJP. (‘Definitions’ (undated) Dalit Freedom Network website, http://www.dalitnetwork.org/go?/dfn/about/C20/#gujjar – Accessed 6 September 2007 – Attachment 8).

Previous Research

• Research Response IND16215, dated 13 October 2003, provides similar information on the background and leadership of the Samajwadi Party (Q2&3/pp.5-6) as well as brief accounts of clashes with political rivals (Q5/p.7) (RRT Country Research 2003, Research Response IND16215, 13 October –Attachment 9).

• Research Response IND30381, dated 10 August 2006, mentions the breakaway of the Samajwadi Party from Janata Dal and gives further information about its origins from this organization (Q3/ pp6-10). The report also discusses the relationship between the , Janata Dal, the Samajwadi Party and the Muslims in Maharashtra (Q5/ pp13-18) (RRT Country Research 2006, Research Response IND30381, 10 August – Attachment 10).

Samajwadi Party – Political Allegiances

Various newspaper reports suggest that the Samajwadi Party is constantly shifting its political allegiances:

• An April 2006 report from Yahoo India news website refers to an allegiance between the Samajwadi Party and Telegu Desam Party (TDP), with other minority parties, to form a “third force’ to oppose both the Baratya Janata (BJP) and Congress Parties (‘Samajwadi Party, form Third Force’ 2006, Yahoo India news website, 6 April ,http://telugu-desam- party-news.newslib.com/story/1154-1731691/ – Accessed 24 November 2006 – Attachment 11)

• A March 2009 report from the refers to the Samajwadi Party’s inability to reach a consensus with the Congress Party on the issue of seat-sharing for the constituencies of Uttar Pradesh (‘Samajwadi Party leaves only six seats for Congress in Uttar Pradesh’ 2009, Hindustan Times website, 8 March, http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=RS SFeed-NewDelhi&id=a2a405d1-f640-4c55-bd7d- c2f97f730100&Headline=SP+leaves+only+six+seats+for+Congress+in+UP – Accessed 27 March 2009 – Attachment 12).

Samajwadi Yuvjan Sabha (Samajwadi Youth Wing)

The Youth wing of the Samajwadi Party is known as the Samajwadi Yuvjan Sabha. The following newspaper articles refer to political activities undertaken by the Youth Wing in 2007-2008:

• ‘Samajwadi Party activists protest arrest of Shivpal, Akhilesh Yadav in U.P’ 2008, AndhraNews.net, 9 January http://www.andhranews.net/India/2008/January/9-Samajwadi-Party-activists- 29007.asp – Accessed 31 March 2009 – Attachment 13.

• ‘SP activist killed in UP firing: Clashes after “attack” on Mulayam’s son, brother’ 2008, The Tribune online edition, 10 January, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080110/main7.htm – Accessed 31 March 2009 – Attachment 14.

• ‘SP youth leader gunned down’ 2007, The Hindu Online Edition, 13 June http://www.hindu.com/2007/06/13/stories/2007061303331300.htm – Accessed 31 March 2009 – Attachment 15.

• ‘Mulayam plunges into Assembly poll mode: Samajwadi Party to hold rally in Lucknow on January 29’ 2006, The Hindu Online Edition, 9 January, http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/09/stories/2006010913020300.htm – Accessed 31 March 2009 – Attachment 16.

2. Please provide any relevant information on the Labra Khuna terrorist group (Maowadi group) and the scope of its activities. Does the group operate in Punjab State, Haryana, or states with Sikh communities?

Labra Khuna

A search conducted using several variations of spelling for ‘Labra Khuna’ produced no information. The Maowadi

A search of the web provided sources which suggest that ‘maowadi’ is a term of reference for Maoist insurgents (Maoist insurgents are also referred to as Naxalites).

For example, an Amnesty report, dated 18 December 2001, appeals for action in relation to the arrest and subsequent disappearance of five individuals suspected of links with “the Maowadis (Maoist armed groups that operate in both and India)”. These groups “have historically maintained links with each other. There is a large Nepali community in India and many political groups from Nepal are active within the diaspora”. (Public AI Index: ASA 20/054/2001 UA 321/01 ‘Fears for Safety: India’,18 December 2001, http://www2.amnesty.se/uaonnet.nsf/d1c4215f6be10b45c1256672003dd2be/bed8385 cd1fa4fc1c1256b2700444eca?OpenDocument – Accessed 2 April 2009 – Attachment 17).

A June 2007 editorial published by The Telegraph links the term maowadi with ‘naxalite’. The editorial focuses particularly on the “Naxal-affected belts” of and Chattisgarh:

The Naxals work on small-time development issues like running some schools, health centres, dams, foodgrain banks, and so on. This gives them local level support, without which they would not be able to survive. The Maoists levy taxes and extort money from contractors and the locals for such work and for procuring the wide range of weapons that they possess. The level of support to Naxals in Jharkhand, where they are fast spreading, however varies.

In areas where the local population sees that significant efforts are being made by the government for improvement, the Naxals are not popular. Who would want to go to a Naxal school if the government school functioned? But in most places people are fed up with the police. Villagers say that if the Naxals come at night and want to be fed, the police invariably turn up next morning and want to be bribed. The choice then is between the “Maowadi and Khaowadi”[Researcher’ s note: My bold].

Anyone interested in these areas, from the local member of parliament or that of the state legislature, to contractors and businessmen, has to have some alliance with the Maoists. How else would elections be held? And how else would contracts be completed? The Naxals argue, “In our zones, anyone can pass through if their identity is clear.” Maoists, in fact, no longer believe in ‘liberated zones’ but in‘zones of influence’,where they co-exist with others and where they have parallel judicial and executive structures – the jan adalat (peoples’ court) and their militia that executes. The smallest unit is the two-man village unit; then there is the area secretary and the area commander. Area decisions are taken together by the area commander and secretary. The sub-zonal committee is overseen by the zonal committee and the zonal commander. They are assisted by a local guerilla squad and a special guerilla squad. Leaders and guerilla squads do not comprise all locals. They can be from any other region. The entire party is underground.

The police have little knowledge of the functioning, except when Naxals are caught and then named ‘commander’, whatever their real status. Thus the local people often suffer police brutalities as there is little to distinguish between them and the Maoists. This is especially so in Jharkhand, where the Naxals are more local (Chenoy, Anuradha 2007,‘Alarming Notes From the Underground’, The Telegraph Calcutta India website, 28 June, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070628/asp/opinion/story_7982241.asp – Accessed 2 April 2009 – Attachment 18).

The same article suggests that the police response to Maoist activity in Jharkhand and Chattisgarh is excessive, and refers to government-sponsored armed militias that have developed in retaliation to Maoist activity:

In the meantime, the police have killed hundreds of alleged Naxalites in ‘encounters’. They do not allow first information reports to be registered and give no compensation to families. The fear of the contesting militia has divided villages and caused fear and internal displacement, forcing villagers to evacuate their houses and camps, leading to unending personal tragedies.

Like the special security forces created earlier to deal with insurgency in the North- east and in Kashmir, the Salwa Judam was created in Chattisgarh. This government- sponsored force of well-armed local volunteers comprises former insurgents and the local youth. This state-armed unofficial militia has caused much harm and turned more people towards insurgency. It has helped militarize the society, where children now dream of guns, and the use of force is the accepted method of negotiation. This militia is unable to distinguish between ordinary civilians and insurgents. They see the entire community as ‘enemy’, similar to the ‘bounty killers’ who are used in all local disputes.

Many human rights groups have recorded the excesses of this militia. Such reports, however, have been ignored. Instead, journalists and activists have been branded as ‘sympathizers’. Meanwhile, the Salsa Judah model is being copied in other areas like Harahan, where the Nark Redshank Semite or Knars has been working along the same lines and all local sources testify to its unpopularity and criminality.

Maximum force has been officially justified because of the killing and looting by the Naxals. Local officials say that once Naxals are caught, torture is essential to extract information. Figures, however, show that the number of Naxal-related incidents has not decreased, rather the number of human rights violations by both sides have significantly increased. Further, if the incidents and violations decrease in one area they simultaneously increase in another. For example, incidents of Nasality strikes have gone down in Andhra Pradesh, but if nine out of 16 districts were affected in Chattisgarh, 18 out of 22 districts are affected in Jharkhand today (Chenoy, Anuradha 2007, ‘Alarming Notes From the Underground’, The Telegraph Calcutta India website, 28 June http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070628/asp/opinion/story_7982241.asp – Accessed 2 April 2009 – Attachment 19).

The Maoist Insurgency – States affected

The Asian Centre for Human Rights published a report on the Naxal Conflict in 2007 which included information on activities in Uttar Pradesh. According to the report, Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh declared the Naxalite Conflict to be the “single biggest internal security challenge ever faced by our country”. The report suggests that, across various parts of India, the Naxalites have been responsible for violations of international humanitarian laws and indiscriminate killing of civilians. The report also contains an analysis of the national and state governments’ responses to the Naxalite threat, including the introduction of socio-economic programs, and the strengthening of security forces. The report suggests that during 2006 killings have occurred as a result of the Naxal Conflict in Andhra Pradesh, , , Jharkand, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, and (Naxal Conflict in 2006 2007, Asian Centre for Human Rights website, 19 January, http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/naxal0107.pdf – Accessed 24 November 2008 – Attachment 20).

In addition to the states named in the above report, a news article from The Tribune dated 23 May 2008 suggests that Maoist insurgency has also effected Haryana and the National Capital Region (‘ADGP: Force to be strengthened’ 2008, The Tribune Online Edition: Haryana Edition, May 24, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080524/haryana.htm#8 – Accessed 3 April 2008 – Attachment 21).

An article dated 11 December 2008, printed in The Economist, reports that the Maoist insurgency is growing across India, particularly in areas affected by poverty:

Away from the border, India’s Maoist insurgency is getting less attention. Its militants, known as Naxalites, after the West Bengali village where they launched their struggle in 1967, have spent most of the intervening years fighting each other. But in 2004 they united to form the (Maoist). Its influence has now spread to 220 of India’s 611 districts, of which 76 are considered "seriously affected". The Naxalites hold little territory, apart from some roadless forest in Chhattisgarh and Maharashtra. But they have an army of ragged revolutionaries estimated at 12,000, and big ambitions.

Increasingly, where Indians have grievances, as recently in West Bengal over land disputes, Naxalites crop up. They are a symptom of India’ s corrupt and malfunctioning state: thriving, in poor and crowded parts of Uttar Pradesh (UP), Madhya Pradesh and Bihar, where the district administration is weakest. In the short term, they represent a law-and-order problem which India needs to address more urgently. But in the end the only solution to the Maoist problem will be the Chinese one: rapid economic development (‘A special report on India: Where invisible threads fray’ 2008, The Economist, 11 December – Attachment 22).

A report dated February 2009, published by the People’ s Union for Democratic Rights, a civil liberties and democratic rights organisation, contains information specific to the state of , but also makes brief mention of neighbouring states such as Uttar Pradesh. The report suggests that “not a single case related to any incident of Maoist violence of any kind has been registered in Uttarakhand”. This report suggests that the repression in some states of perceived maoist activity has little relation to active insurgency:

After speaking to both, officials, district as well as police, and the family members of the accused and activists, we consider the Maoist threat in Uttarakhand to be more conjured than real. State repression is happening for chiefly three reasons:

1. Insecurity resulting from emergence of CPN (Maoists) in Nepal

as a major political force and the likelihood of its appeal spilling

over into India;

2. Availability of central government funds to states for combating Maoist [sic];

3. An attempt on the part of the regime to pre-emptively crack

down on opposition against large scale alienation of land and

privatization of river water.

The Maoist bogey has come in handy for local power wielders too to use against their opponents such as peasant or social activists etc raising demands for land ceiling laws and distribution of land to landless peasants. Repression broadly functions in a couple of ways: either through arrests, brutal torture in police custody, being implicated falsely in cases, and/or through a sinister campaign of striking fear in the everyday lives of people (Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, Uttarakhand Dakhal, Peoples Union for Democratic Rights, 2009, Police Repression in Uttarakhand (Bogey of ‘Left Extremism and Attack on Political and Social Activists’), February http://www.pudr.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=176&Ite mid=63 – Accessed 3April 2009 – Attachment 23).

The Rediff News website contains a useful background report on the Naxalites, their origins and ideology, and the areas in which they operate, posted on 2 October 2003 (Diwanji, A.K 2003,‘Who Are The Naxalites’, the Rediff News site, 2 October, (http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/oct/02spec.htm – Accessed 14 July 2006 – Attachment 24).

3. Please provide information on the level of police or military protection available to persons threatened by extremist groups in Uttar Pradesh.

A number of reports were located which reported that the force has been pursuing an aggressive campaign against Maoist (or Naxalite) insurgents. Nonetheless, it was not clear from this information whether the commitment of the Uttar Pradesh police force to combating Maoist forces necessarily translated into effective state protection and greater levels of security for citizens of Uttar Pradesh. A number of sources were located which reported on the abuse of human rights by officers of the Uttar Pradesh police force, which is reported to be one of the worst police services in India in terms of corruption and abuses of power. An overview of the available information follows below.

Uttar Pradesh police force – campaign against Maoist insurgency

Articles have appeared regularly in the Indian press which report that the Uttar Pradesh police force is actively campaigning against Maoist insurgents in the state of Uttar Pradesh:

• On 22 March 2009 United News of India reported that “Police today claimed to have arrested a naxalite, who was carrying a reward of Rs 7,500 on his head, from Raipur area of this naxal infested Uttar Pradesh district” (‘Naxalite nailed down in Sonebhadra’ 2009, webindia123.com, 22 March http://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/India/20090322/1205249.html – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 25).

• On 2 February 2009 the Indo-Asian News Service reported that “As many as 800 detonators were seized from three men nabbed in the Maoist infested district of Uttar Pradesh, police said on Monday (‘Three arrested with 800 detonators in Uttar Pradesh’ 2009, Hindustan Times, source: Indo- Asian News Service, 2 February http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=Ho mePage&id=b356b2b7-2567-4fbe-b03f-e7ef4ec4ef83&ParentID=b54f97d4- c51f-4d0a-ac72- 7fdedf849c2a&Headline=Three+arrested+with+800+detonators+in+Uttar+Pra desh – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 26).

• On 9 August 2008 the Indo-Asian News Service reported that “Uttar Pradesh police Saturday claimed to have foiled a bid by Maoists to plant mines and set off explosions in ” (‘Uttar Pradesh police foil Maoist terror plans’ 2008, Thaindian News, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 9 August http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-news/uttar-pradesh-police-foil- maoist-terror-plans_10082026.html – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 27).

• On 25 October 2008 the Indo-Asian News Service reported that a “Maoist guerrilla, wanted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the in over 40 criminal cases, was arrested in Sonebhadra district of Uttar Pradesh” (‘Wanted Maoist guerrilla arrested in Uttar Pradesh’ 2008, , source: Indo-Asian News Service, 25 October http://www.zeenews.com/States/2008-10-25/478829news.html – Accessed 3 April 2009 –Attachment 28).

• On 19 April 2007 reported that “A Naxal zonal commander carrying a bounty of Rs one lakh was killed in an encounter in ” (‘Naxalite killed in Lucknow encounter’ 2007, The Times of India, 19 April http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NEWS/India/Naxalite_killed_in_Lucknow _encounter/articleshow/1924801.cms – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 29).

• On 18 May 2005 The Times of India reported that “hard core naxalite, wanted in several cases of kidnappings and murder, was arrested in the Naugarh area in Chandauli district of Uttar Pradesh” (‘Hardcore naxalite held’ 2005, Times of India, 18 May http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1115064.cms – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 30).

It would appear, nonetheless, that Maoist operations continue to be reported from Uttar Pradesh. Examples follow:

• On 20 April 2008 Indian Express reported that “persons were killed and another injured when the CPI (Maoist) cadres fired indiscriminately at the trucks plying on National Highway-33 near Chandil in East Singhum district on Friday night” (Prasad, M. 2008, ‘Two truckers killed in Maoist fire’, Indian Express, 20 April http://www.indianexpress.com/news/two-truckers-killed-in- maoist-fire/299124/ – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 31).

• During elections held in Uttar Pradesh in May 2007 the threat of the Maoist insurgency in certain areas saw the deployment of “100,000 personnel of the central paramilitary forces and provincial armed constabulary (PAC)…in and around the 680 villages where Maoist rebels hold sway in the three districts of , Chandauli and Sonbhadra” (‘Maoist affected areas in sixth phase of polls’ 2007, Two Circles website, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 2 May http://www.twocircles.net/2007may02/maoist-affected-areas-sixth-phase- polls.html – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 32).

• In October 2005 Frontline reported that Maoists had “engineered landmine blasts in eastern Uttar Pradesh killing 15 policemen (Ramakrishnan, V. 2005, ‘The Naxalite Challenge’, Frontline, vol.22: no.21, 8-21 October http://www.flonnet.com/fl2221/stories/20051021006700400.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 33).

Uttar Pradesh police force – corruption, extortion and human rights abuse

Reports were also located which accused officers of the Uttar Pradesh police of targeting and harassing certain Uttar Pradesh residents as suspected Naxalites with little or no evidence. On 3 January 2006 the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) reported that the following individuals were subject to treatment of this kind:

The AHRC is informed that the victim Mr. Ram Prasad Bharati, a resident of Chandauli District, Uttar Pradesh is under continuous threat from the police officers from Naugarh and Chakia. It is alleged that Mr. A. K. Singh and Mr. Ramawadh Yadav, both police officers attached with Majhgavan police station, is alleged to have taken the victim into custody from his house on 15 September 2005 and detained the victim at Majhgavan police station for a few hours on the pretext of investigating into alleged Naxilite [sic] activities in the area. It is alleged that while the victim was in custody the arresting officers as well as senior police officers including the Superintend [sic] of Police from Chandauli have threatened the victim that he would be soon murdered in a fake encounter killing.

…encounter killing is the common ruse posed by the law enforcement agencies in India for extra judicial killing.

…Mr. Ram Prasad Bharati, is a resident of Vishasharpur under the jurisdiction of Naugarh police station in Uttar Pradesh, India. Since 2003 he is been chased by the police officers from Naugarh police station for unknown reasons. It is suspected that the police suspect him for alleged involvement for Naxilite [sic] activities which is prohibited by law in India. It is equally suspected that the police want to put pressure upon Prasad to work as an informer to the police. In either case, the way the police is dealing with Prasad is in the most inhuman way (‘UA-003-2006: INDIA: Uttar Pradesh police stocks cartridges to murder an innocent man’ 2006, Asian Human Rights Commission, 3 January http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2006/1438/?print=yes – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 34).

On 26 March 2009 The Hindu reported that the Uttar Pradesh police was overwhelmingly responsible for the greater proportion of police killings recorded in the preceding year, and that a disproportionate number of those killed were Muslims. The extract follows:

Andhra Pradesh saw high numbers of killings, but mainly of Maoist insurgents of Hindu origin. Instead, an overwhelming majority of killings of Muslims by the police took place in Uttar Pradesh – a State where they make up 18 per cent of the population, not dissimilar to their share of deaths in police firing. The Uttar Pradesh police offensive, targeting violent organised crime, has claimed hundreds of lives in recent years – of Hindus and Muslims. In 2007, the last year for which the NCRB figures are available, the Uttar Pradesh police accounted for 102 of the 250 civilian lethal force fatalities nationwide. By way of contrast, the police fire in Andhra Pradesh led to the loss of 30 lives, while Maharashtra registered 27 deaths. reported 22 fatalities, most of them during caste riots. In 2006, Uttar Pradesh saw 103 fatalities, second only to insurgency-devastated Chhattisgarh. And in 2005, it recorded 42 deaths, placing the State third in police-firing fatalities after Andhra Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir (Swami, P. 2009, ‘The decline of the “encounter death”‘, the Hindu, 26 March http://www.thehindu.com/2009/03/26/stories/2009032654540800.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 35).

Articles have also appeared which report that corruption and the practice of extortion is a serious problem within the Uttar Pradesh police force. Examples follow:

• On 20 June 2008 it was reported by the Indo-Asian News Service that extortion remained a serious problem and that: “Uttar Pradesh police chief Vikram Singh wants his department to tap the telephones of corrupt policemen and also film cops extorting money on highways. Director General Vikram Singh issued the order Thursday”. It was also reported that: “As many as 14 corrupt policemen have been suspended and six have been sacked in the past one week in the state” (‘Tap phones of corrupt cops, police chief says’ 2008, Thaindian.com, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 20 June http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/tap-phones-of-corrupt- cops-police-chief-says_10062530.html – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 36).

• On 24 February 2008 the Indo-Asian News Service reported that the “Lucknow Senior Superintendent of Police Akhil Kumar has admitted to a thriving nexus between criminals and police personnel” (‘Lucknow top cop admits unholy nexus’ 2008, MSN News, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 24 February http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp- documentid=1258719 – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 37).

It may be of interest that the Samajwadi Party has reportedly lodged complaints against an Uttar Pradesh police force officer for being partisan to Uttar Pradesh’s ruling Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP). Similar claims have also been filed by the (BJP). On 27 March 2009 the Indo-Asian News Service reported that the “Election Commission [had] transferred three senior police officials in Uttar Pradesh after complaints that they were favouring the ruling Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)”. The report continues:

In a statement in Friday, the poll panel said: “The EC orders the transfer of SSP , SP and SP .”

…According to sources in the parties, who filed these complaints, the officials were favouring Lok Sabha candidates of the BSP. “The complaint against the officials of Gorakhpur and Kushinagar was filed by our sitting MP as they were extending undue favours to the BSP candidates Vinay shanker Tiwari and Swami Nath Maurya from these two places,” a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) party source told IANS from Gorakhpur.

The complaint against Aditya was lodged by the Samajwadi Party for favouring BSP candidate Vinay Shakya and also for allegedly harassing the party workers and confiscating the gun licenses of those favouring the party, a Samajwadi Party source told IANS over phone from Mainpuri (‘Poll panel transfers three Uttar Pradesh police officers’ 2009, Sindh Today, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 27 March http://www.sindhtoday.net/south-asia/80181.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 38).

It would appear that the Uttar Pradesh police force has, historically, had a poor reputation in terms of protecting human rights. In August 2003 the Human Rights Documentation Center (HRDC) published a report which was critical of the performance of the Uttar Pradesh police force in a number of regards. According to this report: “The National Human Rights Commission’s (NHRC) Annual Report for 2000-2001…documents striking statistics indicating that for several years Uttar Pradesh has outstripped every other state in the numbers of custodial deaths and extrajudicial executions”. Extracts follow:

Extrajudicial executions and custodial deaths have long been part of the Indian socio- political landscape. In the 1960s, the euphemism ‘encounter killings’ began to be used to describe extrajudicial killings because of the frequency with which officials would claim that the deceased had been killed in an ‘encounter’ with police. Calling these acts “custodial deaths” and “encounter deaths,” masks the harsh reality of what happens at the ground level in Uttar Pradesh.

Police abuse of authority is so prevalent in Uttar Pradesh that the High Court responded in outrage in a 2001 opinion:

“A large number of petitions are coming up before this court with allegations against the Police that they are behaving like bandits, thieves, rapist and petty criminals…The police are supposed to protect the people and not to rape, black mail or loot them…it is high time that the police also start behaving in a civilised manner.”

The National Human Rights Commission’s (NHRC) Annual Report for 2000-2001 supports the ’s concern, and documents striking statistics indicating that for several years Uttar Pradesh has outstripped every other state in the numbers of custodial deaths and extrajudicial executions. Since the NHRC’s first report in 1993, Uttar Pradesh has dominated the list of custodial deaths and rape with a total of 940 reported cases so far. During 2000-2001, the state topped the list of fake encounter deaths with 68 cases out of the 109 reported to the NHRC from across the country (‘Uttar Pradesh – Police Brutality Unchecked’ 2003, Human Rights Documentation Center, 22 August http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRF82.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 39).

More recently, on 4 February 2009, The Hindu has reported that “[e]very now and then the U.P. police [is] in the news for bad reasons”. The report notes criticisms of the Uttar Pradesh police force, voiced by the India’s Minister of State for Women and Child Development , which took issue with reports of the mistreatment of women and members of the lower caste communities by Uttar Pradesh police officers.

Minister of State for Women and Child Development Renuka Chowdhury on Tuesday strongly criticised Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati for the ’s insensitivity towards women.

Reacting to the latest incident of two policemen beating up a 6-year-old Dalit girl charged with theft, Ms. Chowdhury said one could only “congratulate” the Chief Minister for her concern for women and “” whom she represented.

Every now and then the U.P. police was in the news for bad reasons. Be it the Nithari killings, the Arushi double murder case, missing girls, and now this beating up of the Dalit girl, Ms. Chowdhury pointed out. The police force there needed to be sensitised, she added.

…Meanwhile, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has described the beating up of the child as “shocking and outrageous” and asked the Uttar Pradesh government to inform it about the action taken, failing which it would send its team to investigate the matter and recommend action (‘Uttar Pradesh police need to be sensitised: Renuka Chowdhury’ 2008, The Hindu, 4 February http://www.thehindu.com/2009/02/04/stories/2009020455791400.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009 – Attachment 40).

List of Sources Consulted

Internet Sources:

Google Search Engine (http://www.google.com.au)

Databases:

FACTIVA (news database) BACIS (DIAC Country Information database) REFINFO (IRBDC (Canada) Country Information database) ISYS (RRT Research & Information database, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, US Department of State Reports) RRT Library Catalogue

List of Attachments

1. Shankar Sahay, Tara ‘Know the Samajwadi Party’ 2004, Rediff News, May 7 http://in.rediff.com/election/2004/may/07espec2.htm – Accessed 9 March 2006.

2. ‘About the Party’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/party.html – Accessed 27 March 2009. 3. ‘Leaders’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/leaders.html – Accessed 27 March 2009.

4. ‘Party in Parliament – Rajya Sabha’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/rajyasabha.html – Accessed 27 March 2009.

5. ‘Party in Parliament – Lok Sabha’ (undated), Samajwadi Party website, http://www.samajwadipartyindia.com/english/loksabha.html – Accessed 27 March 2009.

6. Harrison, T., Jones, S., Lunn, J., Smith, B., Taylor, C., & Youngs, T. 2007, A political introduction to India, UK Parliament Website, International Affairs and Defence Section – House of Commons Library, May 2, http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007-041.pdf – Accessed 11 October 2007.

7. ‘Definitions’ (undated) Dalit Freedom Network website, http://www.dalitnetwork.org/go?/dfn/about/C20/#gujjar – Accessed 6 September 2007.

8. ‘Definitions’ (undated) Dalit Freedom Network website, http://www.dalitnetwork.org/go?/dfn/about/C20/#gujjar – Accessed 6 September 2007.

9. RRT Country Research 2003, Research Response IND16215, 13 October.

10. RRT Country Research 2006, Research Response IND30381, 10 August.

11. ‘Samajwadi Party, Telugu Desam Party form Third Force’ 2006, Yahoo India news website, 6 April ,http://telugu-desam-party- news.newslib.com/story/1154-1731691/ – Accessed 24 November 2006

12. ‘Samajwadi Party leaves only six seats for Congress in Uttar Pradesh’ 2009, Hindustan Times website, 8 March, http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=RS SFeed-NewDelhi&id=a2a405d1-f640-4c55-bd7d- c2f97f730100&Headline=SP+leaves+only+six+seats+for+Congress+in+UP – Accessed 27 March 2009

13. ‘Samajwadi Party activists protest arrest of Shivpal, Akhilesh Yadav in U.P’ 2008, AndhraNews.net, 9 January http://www.andhranews.net/India/2008/January/9-Samajwadi-Party-activists- 29007.asp – Accessed 31 March 2009

14. ‘SP activist killed in UP firing: Clashes after “attack” on Mulayam’s son, brother’ 2008, The Tribune online edition, 10 January, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080110/main7.htm – Accessed 31 March 2009

15. ‘SP youth leader gunned down’ 2007, The Hindu Online Edition, 13 June http://www.hindu.com/2007/06/13/stories/2007061303331300.htm – Accessed 31 March 2009

16. ‘Mulayam plunges into Assembly poll mode: Samajwadi Party to hold rally in Lucknow on January 29’ 2006, The Hindu Online Edition, 9 January, http://www.hindu.com/2006/01/09/stories/2006010913020300.htm – accessed 31 March 2009

17. Public AI Index: ASA 20/054/2001 UA 321/01 ‘Fears for Safety: India’,18 December 2001, http://www2.amnesty.se/uaonnet.nsf/d1c4215f6be10b45c1256672003dd2be/b ed8385cd1fa4fc1c1256b2700444eca?OpenDocument – Accessed 2 April 2009

18. Chenoy, Anuradha 2007,‘Alarming Notes From the Underground’, The Telegraph Calcutta India website, 28 June, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070628/asp/opinion/story_7982241.asp – Accessed 2 April 2009

19. Chenoy, Anuradha 2007,‘Alarming Notes From the Underground’, The Telegraph Calcutta India website, 28 June, http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070628/asp/opinion/story_7982241.asp – Accessed 2 April 2009

20. Naxal Conflict in 2006 2007, Asian Centre for Human Rights website, 19 January, http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/naxal0107.pdf – Accessed 24 November 2008

21. ‘ADGP: Force to be strengthened’ 2008, The Tribune Online Edition: Haryana Edition, May 24, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080524/haryana.htm#8 – Accessed 3 April 2009

22. ‘A special report on India: Where invisible threads fray’ 2008, The Economist, 11 December.

23. Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, Uttarakhand Dakhal, Peoples Union for Democratic Rights, Delhi 2009, Police Repression in Uttarakhand (Bogey of ‘Left Extremism and Attack on Political and Social Activists’), February http://www.pudr.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=1 76&Itemid=63 – Accessed 3April 2009

24. Diwanji, A.K 2003,‘ Who Are The Naxalites’, the Rediff News site, 2 October, (http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/oct/02spec.htm – Accessed 14 July 2006

25. ‘Naxalite nailed down in Sonebhadra’ 2009, webindia123.com, 22 March http://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/India/20090322/1205249.html – Accessed 3 April 2009

26. ‘Three arrested with 800 detonators in Uttar Pradesh’ 2009, Hindustan Times, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 2 February http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=Ho mePage&id=b356b2b7-2567-4fbe-b03f-e7ef4ec4ef83&ParentID=b54f97d4- c51f-4d0a-ac72- 7fdedf849c2a&Headline=Three+arrested+with+800+detonators+in+Uttar+Pra desh – Accessed 3 April 2009

27. ‘Uttar Pradesh police foil Maoist terror plans’ 2008, Thaindian News, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 9 August http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-news/uttar-pradesh-police-foil- maoist-terror-plans_10082026.html – Accessed 3 April 2009

28. ‘Wanted Maoist guerrilla arrested in Uttar Pradesh’ 2008, Zee News, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 25 October http://www.zeenews.com/States/2008- 10-25/478829news.html – Accessed 3 April 2009

29. ‘Naxalite killed in Lucknow encounter’ 2007, The Times of India, 19 April http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NEWS/India/Naxalite_killed_in_Lucknow _encounter/articleshow/1924801.cms – Accessed 3 April 2009

30. ‘Hardcore naxalite held’ 2005, Times of India, 18 May http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1115064.cms – Accessed 3 April 2009

31. Prasad, M. 2008, ‘Two truckers killed in Maoist fire’, Indian Express, 20 April http://www.indianexpress.com/news/two-truckers-killed-in-maoist- fire/299124/ – Accessed 3 April 2009

32. ‘Maoist affected areas in sixth phase of polls’ 2007, Two Circles website, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 2 May http://www.twocircles.net/2007may02/maoist-affected-areas-sixth-phase- polls.html – Accessed 3 April 2009

33. Ramakrishnan, V. 2005, ‘The Naxalite Challenge’, Frontline, vol.22: no.21, 8- 21 October http://www.flonnet.com/fl2221/stories/20051021006700400.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009

34. ‘UA-003-2006: INDIA: Uttar Pradesh police stocks cartridges to murder an innocent man’ 2006, Asian Human Rights Commission, 3 January http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2006/1438/?print=yes – Accessed 3 April 2009

35. Swami, P. 2009, ‘The decline of the “encounter death”‘, the Hindu, 26 March http://www.thehindu.com/2009/03/26/stories/2009032654540800.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009

36. ‘Tap phones of corrupt cops, police chief says’ 2008, Thaindian.com, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 20 June http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/tap-phones-of-corrupt- cops-police-chief-says_10062530.html – Accessed 3 April 2009

37. ‘Lucknow top cop admits unholy nexus’ 2008, MSN News, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 24 February http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp- documentid=1258719 – Accessed 3 April 2009

38. ‘Poll panel transfers three Uttar Pradesh police officers’ 2009, Sindh Today, source: Indo-Asian News Service, 27 March http://www.sindhtoday.net/south- asia/80181.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009

39. ‘Uttar Pradesh – Police Brutality Unchecked’ 2003, Human Rights Documentation Center, 22 August http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRF82.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009

40. ‘Uttar Pradesh police need to be sensitised: Renuka Chowdhury’ 2008, The Hindu, 4 February http://www.thehindu.com/2009/02/04/stories/2009020455791400.htm – Accessed 3 April 2009