Team of Indian Attorneys ‘and Intelligence officers is vigorously preparing the case for the extradition of two Sikh young men, Ranjit Singh Gill and Sukhminder Singh Sandhu, who were arrested by the F.B.I. from a New Jersey gas statrt in the second week of May, 1987. The hearing for their case is fixed for November 2, 1987. Mr. Gill and Mr. Sandhu are important functionaries of the All India Sikh Student Federation and were deeply involved in the political program of the Federation.

Indian plea for their extradition, however, is not likely to be accepted by the court in view of the fact that U.S. has no direct treaty with India regarding extradition. India is relying on the treaty that U.S. signed with the British rulers in India much before India gained independence. According to that treaty no person can be extradited for a political act, and it is the judge who decides, and not the US. Government, whether the fugitive’s offence in his own country was political or not.

The case of Irish activist Joseph Doherty illustrates how difficult extradition from U.S.A. can be. Doherty killed a policeman in Belfast in Northern Ireland in 1980; He was arrested but escaped from jail and fled to the US.A. Subsequently, he was tried in absentia and sentenced to life imprisonment, the most severe punishment a British court can award.

Keen that Doherty should serve his prison term, the British government requested the US. administration to extradite him. Doherty moved a law court and the judge blocked his extradition, ruling that his slaying was a political act. The US. government then moved to a Federal Appeals Court, but its appeal was rejected.

If Doherty, convicted of a killing, can block his extradition for therefore years, how can Mr. Gill and Mr. Sandhu, who are only suspected to be involved in some killings, be sent back to face sure death either in the police torture cells or in a staged police encounter. US. Judges are not unaware of the police practices in India, They know how alleged suspects are eliminated by the pol? ice and ‘then’ for public consumption stories of escape from prison are concocted.

According to U.S, Immigration and Naturalization Service officials, nobody could be deported from the US.A. unless he or she violated the US, law. Besides, the person sought to be deported, could appeal against it As in India, person in US.A. can always move a higher court to appeal ‘against the judgment of a lower court. That is how another Irish activist, William J. Quinn, has’ been blocking his extradition. He was also accused of murder in Britain and had fled to the US.A. The first judge barred his extraction but the High Court reversed. the ruling. He is now appealing to the Supreme Court. These legal recourses are also available to Mr. Gill and Mr, Sandhu.

It is not that U.S, Administration shields outlaws, In all extradition matters, the U.S. government has no locus standi, Unlike in India here only the courts decide, And the reason the US.A. or other ‘Western democracies tend to sympathise with overseas fugitives is because they have a long tradition of providing shelter to political fugitives and because they know * that in certain so called democratic countries also, fascist practice of eliminating political opponents is fairly common and India, in this sphere, too has earned consider ably notoriety.

That is why the US.A. admitted Aquino of the Philippines and) Ferdinand Marcos later. Earlier it admitted the Shah of Iran. Similarly, the U.K. admitted Phizo of Nagaland and Dr. Jagit Singh of Khalistan; France admitted Ayatolah Khomeini. India, to0, provides shelter whenever it suits its politics. It gave shelter to U.Nu of Burma and to Dalai Lama of Tibet.

The US.A and Canada are the best of friends but Charles Ng, an ‘American, killed 25 people in’ California and fled to Canada, Canada refuses to send him back unless California officials promise that he won’t be sentenced to death. In the case of Gill and ‘Sukhminder, if extradited, they are ‘bound to end up at the gallows, if somehow they survive police ate tempts to liquidate them.

The case against them is reportedly based on the alleged confession of a person named! Sukkhdev Singh. But the request of Attomey Mary Pike of go to jab and collect! material for the defense of her clients has been turned down by the Indian authorities. How can Indian Attorneys hope to extradite Mr. Gill and Mr, Sandhu when they are’ not prepared to expose Sukhidey Singh the cross examination of the court and the Defense Counsel when they are blocking every considerable evidence in favor of the accused, Maybe; the Prosection are banking upon politically in flueneing the judgment. How sadly they are mistaken in their assessment of the U.S, courts, only the time will tell.

 

Article extracted from this publication >>  September 11, 1987