The implications of UNHRC report on Kashmir

  06-Jul-2018 15:09:10

KashmirUNHRC

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights released a report on the Situation of Human Rights in Kashmir which is focused on capturing the developments in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir from June 2016 to April 2018 and General Human Rights Concerns in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. Although the Indian government rejected the document, questioning the intent or verifiability of the document, still there are areas that need a careful attention.

The first questions that come into the mind are-

But why was such a report was not accepted in the first place?

Was there something which could have hampered the stance of the Indian government?

Was report reject due to the game of politics?

We might never be able to find definite answers to these questions but we can surely analyze the report and judge for ourselves whether it was “fallacious and motivated”-- as stated by the Ministry of External Affairs--or was there really something going behind the scene.

The report outlines the recent incident of killing of Burhan Wani, the 22-year old leader of the Hizbul Mujahidin, an armed group, which was done by Indian security forces during an armed clash in Bumdoora village in Kokernag area in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. The tense situation in Kashmir started with this incident. The number of protests increased in the valley to which Indian security forces responded with force. This led to casualties and a wide range of alleged related human rights violations throughout the summer of 2016 and which still continues in 2018. While Indian-Administered Kashmir has experienced waves of protests in the past, this current round of protests appears to involve more people than the past, and the profile of protesters has also shifted to include more young, middle-class Kashmiris, including females who do not appear to have been participating in the past. This report has captured the proportion of mob which has led to violent protests and also stated that the difference in groups which are involved in protests.

The protests which grew violent in July 2016 were tackled by the Indian security forces who used excessive force that led to unlawful killings and a very high number of injuries. Civil society estimates are that 130 to 145 civilians were killed by security forces between mid-July 2016 and end of March 2018, and 16 to 20 civilians were killed by armed groups in the same period. These high number of deaths are a matter of concern as the Jammu is Kashmir is monitored by the military and police who have been invested powers under AFSPA Act and if instead of ensuring peace it is leading to a rise in the number of killings then the law has not been enforced in the proper way. Either way, the law needs to be revised or its implementation must be checked by some authorities but the Indian government has not taken any steps towards this direction which raises a big question. If there is a need for such amount of military force then why under its very nose people are still dying? These matters were never discussed in the formal setting nor any NGO or other bodies were allowed to investigate the matter. Even UN had to monitor remotely and rely on the official sources of India and perception of people to come up with the report. So obviously if a UN report is citing these statistics it cannot be ignored.

Also, the report says that to control the unrest, one of the most dangerous weapons, a pellet-firing shotgun, which is a 12-gauge pump-action shotgun that fires metal, pellets were used. Although the AFSPA Act has provisions for use of lethal weapons but this provision contravenes several international standards on the use of force and related principles of proportionality and necessity including the UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which requires law enforcement officials to use firearms only as a last resort, and to use them with lethal intent only when “strictly unavoidable in order to protect life”. Thus this act violates many principles of human rights but the restriction imposed by sections of AFSPA Act prevent any investigation to be carried out on excessive use of force by the armed officials. Any law is made on the basic principle of checks and balances. A provision or rule is made considering the current time and scenario of a place. If the circumstances change then the law needs to be amended or removed. Any provision is subjected to debate and discussion and if that basic property is not allowed then the law can also channelize to the justification of abuse. It seems that the laws which are prevalent in Kashmir are doing exactly the same. Over 1,000 people were detained under the PSA (which is another law prevalent in the valley) between March 2016 and August 2017. Human rights groups had warned Jammu and Kashmir authorities that minors were being arrested under the PSA in 2016 and 2017. These numbers are a clear indication that the systems are not working properly which has led to the growing number of protests in the valley.

In the report, it has also been accepted that Pakistan supports the various armed groups and their operations across the Line of Control in Indian-Administered Kashmir although the government of Pakistan might never officially make this statement. Thus even the world knows the fact that the face of Pakistan is not that clean. If UN has openly accepted this fact then obviously it does not hold Indian government entirely responsible for conditions in the valley. That being said it does not mean that there are no loopholes in our system. The situation was not tackled in the right way. During the 2016 unrest, the state Government suspended mobile and internet services on multiple occasions while imposing restrictions on freedom of expression, targeting media and journalists.] We all know that Freedom of Expression in a Fundamental Right and taking away these rights will worsen the situation. The widespread protests, long periods of curfew and frequent strikes in 2016 and 2017 had a cumulative impact on students and their right to education. The move of the Indian government breaching the fundamental rights just to ensure peace is not feasible and would not continue in the long run. So while there are ceasefire violations from Pakistan but this strong military action by the Indian government in the entire valley has led to increasing civilian casualties and injuries and a large number of people being displaced. Rough estimates suggest that 130 to 145 civilians were killed by security forces between mid-July 2016 and end of March 2018 and 16 to 20 civilians killed by armed groups. The Government of Jammu and Kashmir in 2017 initially said 78 people, including 2 police officers, were killed in the 2016 unrest but in 2017 revised the figure down to 51 people killed and 9,042 injured between 8 July 2016 and 27 February 2017. Thus India should consider the points made by this report and must observe some recommendations suggested in it. Some notable ones point exactly to what should be done in the first place such as looking into AFSPA Act and related human rights violations. Investigations which could ensure transparency will help a long way not just in better administration but also ensuring peace in the valley which has been the prime motive of India.



This is particularly important now that the elected government of Jammu and Kashmir has collapsed, and governor’s rule has been imposed. It will be a hard time for the government to decide what to do in the valley. If it again chooses to flex its muscles then the situation may turn out to be a disaster. So caught in this whirlpool there is only one ray of hope and that is to re-think. The government must now open its eyes and admit the failures it has committed in the past. Rather than playing the blaming game of politics, it must take some concrete measures to secure the lives of people in the valley. The military power has failed to do so and it’s time to resort to other methods to ensure peace. If efforts are not made in this direction then the policy of peace and non-violence followed by India would no longer remain valid and would ultimately distort its image in the world.