Skip to main content

J&K: Defence personnel prosecution: Defence Dept, Army replies contradict


By Venkatesh Nayak*
Last week, there was both good news and “not so good” news on the AFSPA front across the country. The good news is, people in Meghalaya can heave a sigh of relief over the lifting of the draconian Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) from their State.
Meanwhile, the Central Government has claimed that it does not hold files of 47 cases in which it denied sanction to prosecute members of the defence forces for alleged offences and human rights violations said to have been committed in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) while operating under a similar law of 1990 vintage.
On new year’s day, this year (2018), the Ministry of Defence informed Parliament that it had received requests from the J&K Government for sanction to prosecute security personnel in 50 cases that occurred between 2001-2016. While the requests were pending in three cases, the Government had denied sanction to prosecute the accused in other cases involving allegations of “murder or killing of civilians” (17 cases), “rape” (2 cases), “death in security operations” (10 cases), “custodial death” (3 cases), ” beating or torture” (2 cases), “abduction and death (of the abducted person)” (3 cases), “disappearance” (7 cases), “illegal detention” (1 case) “fake encounter” (1 case) and “theft and molestation” (2 cases). I have not invented these labels. The Minister of State for Defence used these labels to describe the alleged incidents while replying to a question raised by Shri Husain Dalwai, MP, in the Rajya Sabha. Apparently the sanction to prosecute the accused in all 47 cases was refused because of insufficient evidence. Click HERE to access the RTI documents of this case.

Prosecution under J&KAFSPA and related case law in a nutshell

Under Section 7 of The Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 (J&K AFSPA) “no prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with the previous sanction of the Central Government, against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers conferred by this Act.”
Through two notifications gazetted in 1990 and 2001, the State Government, declared almost the whole of J&K except Ladakh as “disturbed area” under J&K AFSPA.
Under Section 4 of J&KAFSPA, any commissioned officer, warrant officer or non-commissioned officer of the armed forces of the Union may open fire or use force to the extent of killing any person in a “disturbed area” in J&K who is violating prohibitory orders or is carrying weapons, fire-arms, or explosives. Additionally, security personnel (defence forces and paramilitary forces) are empowered to arrest any person without warrant on the mere suspicion that he or she has committed a cognizable offence (serious offences attracting a jail term of more than 2 years for which the police may arrest the accused without a warrant from a judicial magistrate).
They may enter any premises without warrant to conduct search and seizure operations. They are also empowered to stop and search any vehicle suspected to be carrying any proclaimed offender (a person who is avoiding appearance before a court) or a person who has committed or is suspected to have committed a non-cognizable offence i.e., offences carrying much lesser punishment and for which the accused cannot be arrested without a warrant from a judicial magistrate). Such actions of the security personnel do not require the prior sanction of any authority.
Until recently, according to case law that had developed around AFSPA-type laws, unless there was prior sanction from the Central Government, it was not possible to legally register even a first information report (FIR) with the local police against a member of the defence forces about allegations of offences or human rights violation they were said to have committed in a “disturbed area”. However in July 2016, in the matter of Extra Judicial Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) & Anr vs Union of India & Anr. , the Supreme Court ruled that proceedings in a criminal court can be instituted against defence personnel if an offence is said to have been committed by them through the use of excessive force or retaliatory force resulting in the death of any person. In April 2017, the Apex Court dismissed the Government’s curative petition against this ruling. So now the police can register an FIR in such cases without prior sanction from the Central Government.

The RTI Intervention

After coming across the queries and replies tabled in Parliament in January 2018, I submitted an RTI application to the Ministry of Defence in February, seeking the following information:
“Apropos of the reply to Unstarred Question No. 1463 tabled in the Rajya Sabha on 01/01/2018 (copy along with Annexure is enclosed), by the Hon’ble Minister of State in your Ministry, I would like to obtain the following information under the RTI Act:
A clear photocopy of all official records containing details of the procedure that is required to be followed by your Ministry while deciding whether or not to grant sanction for prosecuting any member of the defence forces for actions committed under the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers, 1990 (J&K AFSPA), including channel(s) of supervision over and accountability of such decision making procedure;
A clear photocopy of all official records/documents containing the norms, criteria and standards that are required to be applied for assessing the evidence submitted by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir in relation to its request for sanction for prosecuting any member of the defence forces for actions committed under J&K AFSPA;
The rank or designation of the officer who is competent to make a final decision on whether or not to grant sanction for prosecuting any member of the defence forces for actions committed under J&K AFSPA in any case (name of the officer is not required);
A clear photocopy of the communication sent by your Ministry to the Government of J&K denying sanction for prosecution of members of the defence forces in all cases listed in the Annexure to the reply to the said Unstarred Question; and
Inspection of every file including all papers, correspondence, file notings and emails, if any, relating to the denial of sanction for prosecution of members of the defence forces as per the list annexed to the reply to the said Unstarred Question and supply of clear photocopies of the relevant papers and electronic files identified by me during the inspection.
I believe that the information sought at paras #1-4 above are required to be proactively disclosed by your Ministry under Sections 4(1)(b), 4(1)(c) and 4(1)(d) of the RTI Act. As I am unable to locate the said information on your official website, I am constrained to file this RTI application. I would like to receive all this information by post at my postal address mentioned above.
As regards the request for inspection of information described at para #5 above, I would be grateful if you would give me sufficient advance notice of the date and time for inspection.”

Defence Ministry’s reply:

The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Department of Defence, D(GS-I/IS) sitting in South Block, transferred the RTI application within a week to another CPIO with the D(AG) who sits in Sena Bhawan. The second CPIO transferred the RTI application to the CPIO, Indian Army within the next four days. Of course neither CPIO bothered to explain what D(GS-I/IS) and D(AG) meant in expanded form. I am still not sure which sections or divisions they might be in the Defence.
Dissatisfied with the reply of the second CPIO, I filed a first appeal with the First Appellate Authority (FAA) against the transfer of my RTI application to the CPIO, Indian Army. In my appeal I argued that the transfer was wrong on the following grounds:
  • As the Minister of State for Defence had submitted some details of the 50 cases to Parliament in January the Department was bound to have the related case files; and
  • Under the Second Schedule attached to the Central Government’s Allocation of Business Rules, 1961, the Indian Army falls under the administrative jurisdiction of the Ministry of Defence. So the Indian Army is not competent to decide whether sanction for prosecuting its personnel should be granted or not. That is the job of the Defence Department or the Ministry of Defence to whom I had sent the RTI application in the first place.
The FAA of the Defence Department has now ruled that the CPIO’s action of transferring the RTI application was correct because the Indian Army was the “custodian” of the information sought in my RTI application.

Indian Army’s reply:

Meanwhile, the CPIO, Indian Army sent me an acknowledgement within a week of receiving the RTI application transferred by the Defence Department. While assigning an identification number to the RTI application, the CPIO explained that as the HQ of the Indian Army worked only five days a week and as there were 8 non-working days in a month, I should accept delayed response. 27 days later he sought extra time to send a substantial reply.
Last week (after more than 40 days of receiving the RTI application), the CPIO sent a final reply claiming that the information sought in my RTI application was “not available/held with the concerned agency of the Army.”

What is wrong with these replies?

If neither the Defence Department nor the Indian Army has the details of cases sent by the J&K Government requesting sanction for prosecution of defence personnel, then what was the basis of the Minister’s reply tabled in Parliament on new year’s day this year? Surely, no other Ministry can be involved as this subject matter is not allocated to them under the Allocation of Business Rules, 1961.
Further, only one of the two public authorities, the Defence Department or the Indian Army, can be telling the truth. Both their RTI replies cannot be true and correct as they contradict each other. Even if the files of all decided cases might have been sent back to J&K, surely an office copy of the replies sent (RTI query#4) would have been maintained by the concerned office.
Further, if the norms, criteria and standards for assessing evidence and the rank and designation of the officer who is competent to make a decision whether to permit prosecution or not, are not written down in any official record, then who in Government rejected the requests for sanction to prosecute defence personnel and by following what procedure?

All of this information should have been proactively disclosed under the RTI Act

Sub-clauses (ii), (iii) and (iv) of Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act require the Defence Department to voluntarily disclose the procedure for decision making and the relatedsupervisory and accountability mechanisms along with the attendant norms and criteria involved in the making of such decisions. Section 4(1)(c) of the RTI Act requires the Defence Department to place all relevant facts in the public domain while announcing decisions that affect the public. The people in J&K and elsewhere in India have the right to know these facts. Under Section 4(1)(d) of the RTI Act, the affected families have the right to know the reasons behind the denial of sanction for prosecution in all 47 cases. Despite pointing to this duty of proactive disclosure in the RTI application, the public authorities have denied the very existence of the case files and information regarding the procedures to be followed and the norms to be applied while denying sanction for prosecution.
Of course, I will move the Central Information Commission against the two public authorities for denying the very existence of the information requested in the RTI application. However, the contradictory RTI replies relating to a matter raised in Parliament is perplexing, to say the least.

*Programme Coordinator, Access to Information Programme, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi

Comments

TRENDING

Constitution day makes us remember and rethink the values that India stands for

By Dr. Kapilendra Das*  India, also known as Bharat, was liberated from British rule and gained Independence on August 15, 1947. So every year on 15th August we celebrate Independence Day throughout the country. The Indians felt the taste of freedom, but there were no rules and regulations to govern the country for which British rules were effective up to January 25, 1950. To govern India, the draft constitution was prepared by the Drafting Committee which was published in January 1948, and the same was finally adopted by the Constituent Assembly on 26 November 1949, the day of an important landmark in India’s journey as an independent, Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic, Republic. The constitution so adopted came into force on 26 January 1950. To memorize 26 January, every year we observe Republic Day throughout India. To mark rethinking and remembrance of the day of adoption of the constitution of India, 26 November has been celebrating as “Constituti

Integrating biodiversity for poverty removal still not binding for this UN body

Reacting to a statement of the executive secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity ( CBD ), United Nations, Elizabeth Maruma Mrema, on the occasion of the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, which fell on October 17, well-known Thiruvananthapuram-based ecologist S Faizi has objected to the CBD’s plan for “effective integration of biodiversity for poverty eradication”. *** I compliment you for issuing this statement . However, I am disappointed to see that the CBD COP's output on poverty and biodiversity, namely the Chennai Guidance is not even referred to in your statement, particularly so since the 12th COP has asked the Executive Secretary to "continue the work requested by the Conference of the Parties in decisions X/6 and XI/22, for the effective integration of biodiversity for poverty eradication and development, taking into account also the related decisions of the Conference of the Parties at its twelfth meeting" and to promote the Chennai

Seventh most vulnerable nation, effects of climate change can be seen in Bangladesh

Mashrur Siddique Bhuiyan*  From November 6–18, 2022, Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt is hosting the 27th Conference of Parties (COP27) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This two-week climate conference is critical for the globe because it occurs at a time when nations are coping with a global energy crisis, the conflict in Ukraine, rising inflation rates, and dwindling funding for climate adaptation. It also has great significance for Bangladesh, as the country's ability to maintain its economic growth depends on raising the necessary finances for urgent climate action and mitigation. This year’s theme is "Delivering for People and the Planet," which aims to hasten global climate action by lowering greenhouse gas emissions, fostering resilience and preparing for climate change's unavoidable effects, and increasing the flow of climate finance to developing nations. The goals of COP27 are based on the outcomes of COP21, which was held in Paris in 2015

Unsung, tens of Morbi youth of local fishing community saved many, many lives

By Rajiv Shah  It was indeed a treat to listen to Bhavik Raja, who spoke at a meeting of the Movement for Secular Democracy the other day in Ahmedabad. Speaking in chaste Gujarati, Raja recalled his childhood days in Mobi when he and his friends would often go to the town's Jhulto Pul (Hanging Bridge) in free time. I listened to him online. The bridge, which should have been given a heritage status, was handed over to the owners of a watch-making tycoon for repair. The repair was carried out so shoddily that it broke down in less than a week after it was opened for general public, leading to the death of more than 140 persons, many of them children. Raja, who formed a group of three-person activists' team on a fact-finding mission to Mobi, said, what isn't taken note of is how tens of youth, belonging to the local Muslim fishing community, jumped into the river and saved many, many lives. It's a marshy river, and to navigate in there is an extremely difficult exercise.

Zakir Naik tumult, Catholic Church power abuse: will Anwar Ibrahim save Malaysia?

Anwar Ibrahim By Jay Ihsan*  Anwar Ibrahim, a hardcore reformist who took a punch to his eye in 1998 from then inspector-general of police, Rahim Noor, has finally been given the mandate by Malaysians to serve as the nation's 10th prime minister. Anwar knows too well the burden of staying true to both trust and faith the people have in him requires every once of commitment and dedication. The question is will he be apologetic for his transgressions enroute to "rebuilding" Malaysia? In his overzealousness to get the job done, Anwar, 75, needs to safeguard every bit of gumption to address prickling issues plaguing the safety of the nation especially those involving communal sensitivities. For one, dare Anwar get rid of terrorist hate preacher and fugitive Zakir Naik for inciting religious unrest in Malaysia? In November 2016, India’s counter-terrorism agency filed an official complaint against Naik, holding him responsible for promoting religious hatred and unlawful activi

Adequate attention not paid on changing human life to realize climate change aim

By Bharat Dogra  Climate change is one of the biggest challenges of our times. It has to be checked as a matter of highest priority. Despite this adequate attention has not been given to how human life must change to realize this objective. We know that fossil fuels must be phased out and replaced by renewable energy. But is renewable energy capable of meeting the present day massive energy requirements, along with the increase taking place? Even if it is, what are the implications if renewable energy has to be scaled up to this level, and at such gigantic level won’t renewable energy also have very adverse consequences, although of a different kind? Such questions make the situation more complicated, but these have to be faced. So let us try to approach the issue in a somewhat different way. Since the daily consumption of various goods and utilities involves the use of fossil fuels in various ways, if all excessive, wasteful and harmful consumption can be given up, this will also lead

Ukraine war revitalizes silent competition between China and Russia in Central Asia

By John P. Ruehl  At the recent Commonwealth for Independent States (CIS) summit held on October 14 in Astana, Kazakhstan, Tajik President Emomali Rahmon expressed previously inconceivable remarks. His public admonishment of Russian President Vladimir Putin to treat Central Asian states with more respect showed the growing confidence of Central Asian leaders amid Russia’s embroilment in Ukraine and China’s expanding regional influence. After coming under Russian imperial rule in the 18th and 19th centuries , five Central Asian states—Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan— emerged independent from the Soviet Union in 1991. While these countries remained heavily dependent on Russia for security, economic, and diplomatic support, China saw an opportunity in their vast resources and potential to facilitate trade across Eurasia. Chinese-backed development and commerce increased after the Soviet collapse and expanded further after the launch of China’s Belt an

Much like earlier meetings, COP 27 fails to find real solution to overcome climate crisis

By NS Venkataraman* COP 27 in Egypt was organized with much fanfare and expectations, similar to COP 26 at Glasgow that was organised in 2021. While nothing significant was achieved in combating the climate crisis subsequent to the Glasgow Meet, one thought that COP 27 would be more productive and would find some real solutions to overcome the climate crisis. Leaders and representatives from most of the countries participated in the COP 27 including the President of USA, Prime Minister of UK and so many others. Cosmetic speeches were made by the leaders, committing themselves to save the world from global warming and noxious emissions. Finally, resolutions would be adopted after representatives of all countries put their heads together . With no tangible agreement about the fundamental issues, the resolutions would inevitably end up as face saving documents. During COP 27, the UAE President clearly said that the UAE would not reduce production of crude oil and natural gas. In t

Bangladesh to import diesel from India: Win-win situation amidst economic turmoil?

Kamal Uddin Mazumder*  Bangladesh and India had been sharing friendly and warm relations since 1971. Both of the countries have been kith and kin through crisis moments. Bangladesh has witnessed India’s support from the liberation war to the Covid-19 pandemic. As now the world is facing the repercussions of the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war through the economic crisis and the energy crisis, India is still with Bangladesh through a cooperative framework. The government of Bangladesh had decided to cut down its fuel consumption to keep up with the global energy crisis. It was necessary to import fuel at the cheapest possible rate to mitigate the crisis. Some talks had been initiated with countries like Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and Brunei but India came forward first. The geographical proximity and the longest shared border had ushered multidimensional ways of cooperation and collaboration in many areas. The import of diesel from India through the pipeline is one of the prime example

Maldives migrants' death: Govt bodies haven't done enough for workers' safety, security

By Kirity Roy*  We have been notified by the media that a hazardous fire, which erupted in a cramped neighborhood of Maldivian capital Male, has killed 10 migrant workers including 9 Indians. We are much aggrieved by this incident, and sending our heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims. Many are missing. Almost half the population in the Maldivian capital constitutes of migrant workers, and out of them many are Indians. During the COVID-19 pandemic it was reported by many media outlets that due to the cramped and unsuitable living conditions, the disease spread more rapidly among the foreign workers than anywhere else in the country. This brought the light upon the serious housing problem for the migrant workers in the country. The current incident shows that the Government bodies have not done enough to ensure safety and security for the workers. While the United Nations have established the rights of the Migrant workers through the International Convention on the Prot