Petition to the Supreme Court of India
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
This latest update describes the progress of a petition filed in the Supreme Court of India to properly examine encounter killings by security forces in the state of Manipur. It is hoped the strategy adopted by the petitioners and the positive results got so far will be useful reading. The update was drafted by Mr. Babloo Loitongbam, Executive Director of Human Rights Alert, Manipur. Encounter killings by security forces in Manipur: Petition to the Supreme Court of India Manipur is a one of the seven sister States of the North East India, bordering Myanmar. Popular discontent dating from the way in which the state was brought into the union of India in 1949 and subsequent discriminatory treatment fumed resistance movements which eventually escalated into an open armed conflict in the late 1970s. Since then, police and armed forces involved in counter insurgency activities have been enjoying impunity and human rights violations have been massive and systemic. In one way or another, everyone in Manipur is affected by the decades‐old conflict situation. But perhaps the most distressing are the numerous cases of young women who suddenly became helpless widows when their husbands were killed in “fake encounters” by the security forces. There are also many bereaved parents whose sons became targets of trigger‐happy police and security forces in the guise of counter‐insurgency operations. When these young widows and grief‐stricken mothers met, often quite accidentally as strangers, they found instant rapport and mutual solace. Gradually, after many informal meetings, they felt the need for a common platform to pursue their determination to bring the culprits to justice. The outcome was the formation, on 11 July 2009 in Imphal, the capital of Manipur, of the Extrajudicial Execution Victim Families’ Association, Manipur (EEVFAM). Human Rights Alert (HRA), an NGO formed by human rights defenders in Manipur, has personally known most family members of the victims of extra‐judicial killings in the course of their human rights documentation activities since the 1990s. HRA facilitated the formation of EEVFAM and helped them with all possible assistance in facing organizational teething troubles as well as facilitating trauma counseling, legal aid, and establishing self‐help groups for livelihood activities. When the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Summary or Arbitrary Executions Professor Christof Heyns made an official mission to India in March 2012, a 70 member strong EEVFAM delegation took a 16 hour bus journey to neighbouring Assam to tell their stories to the Special Rapporteur. A memorandum, prepared with the help of a civil society coalition, along with a list of 1528 extrajudicial executions since 1979. The UN expert’s patient listening and deep interest to the plight of EEVFAM provided them with a glimmer of hope to their long and arduous struggle for justice. On presenting a copy of the memorandum to Advocate Colin Gonsalves, a leading human rights advocate based in Delhi, the idea of approaching the Supreme Court of India was born. If the Supreme Court is instituting Special Investigation Teams (SIT) to investigate fake encounters elsewhere in India, why not in Manipur too where the phenomena is most endemic? Thus in September 2012 with support of Colin’s organization, the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by EEVFAM and HRA to the Hon’ble Supreme Court praying for (1) Instituting an Special Investigation Team (SIT) on the extrajudicial executions; (2) Compensating the families to rebuild their lives, and (3) Removing the existing legal barriers to prosecute the perpetrators. A division bench consisting of Justice Aftab Alam and Justice Ranjana Desai admitted the case on 1 October 2012. Upon receiving affidavits from Manipur Government, the Union of India and the National Human Rights Commission and upon hearing the argument from all sides, the Supreme Court decided to appoint a High Power Commission headed by Justice N. Santosh Hegde, former Judge, Supreme Court of India and with Mr. J.M. Lyngdoh, former Chief Election Commissioner and Dr. Ajaikumar Singh, IPS. (Retd. DGP and IGP of Karnataka) as members. The Commission is mandated “to be fully satisfied about the truth of the allegations concerning the cases cited by the writ petitioners”. The Commission is mandated to inquire into six randomly chosen cases of 2009 ‐2010 namely the deaths of Azad Khan (12), Umakanta Chongtham (24), N. Nobo Meitei (27) and his cousin N. Gobin Meitei (25), Kiranjit Elangbam (24), Yumnam Kumarjit (19) and Khumbongmayum Orsonjit (19). The Commission is also to look into the functioning of police and security forces in counter‐insurgency operations in terms of parameters laid down by the Constitution and the laws. The Commission invited statement on affidavits from people having knowledge of the 6 cases. Cross examination of the witnesses were held at Imphal from 3 to 7 March 2013. Advocate Mukul Sinha, with long experience of handling fake encounter cases in Gujarat, led the panel of lawyers on behalf of the petitioners. A solid evidence base was built up through the cross examination of the police witnesses. However, the witnesses of the armed forces, in the instance case all Assam Rifles, did not turn up on the ground that they have been transferred outside Manipur. Therefore the Commission decided to continue the cross examination in Delhi from 13 to 21 March 2013. But when the Commission reconvened in Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi on the morning of 13 March, still none of the witnesses turned up. The counsel of the Ministry of Defense (MoD) sought an adjournment till noon and eventually the witnesses did come and depose before the Commission. On 21 March, the Commission sought suggestions from all the parties. The petitioners presented an analysis of the overall situation and a 12 point charter of recommendations, including setting up an SIT on 25 serious cases, setting up Human Rights Courts in every district, and doing away with prior sanction and granting the sanction within 30 days. Moreover it is also proposed that a Commission be set up to restore democracy and repeal the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. The Supreme Court opened the Commission report on 4 April 2013 and has publicized its main findings ‐ all the six cases of encounter are not genuine, and all seven persons killed in the incidents did not have any prior criminal records. But curiously the Court declined the petitioner’s request to obtain a copy of the report, “to avoid sensationalizing its contents”. But anyway now that the truth by the Commission is told, the Supreme Court is expected to eventually deliver the long awaited justice and come out with a befitting verdict soon! .