delegation from the House to be allowed to visit Kashmir shortly. I welcome the visit that is to be made to Kashmir next month by my right honorable friend, the Member of Manchester Gorton (Mr Kaufman),
“Some 56 British Members of Parliament, representing all political parties and from all parts of the United Kingdom, have now signed and supported motions on the Order Paper calling for the people of Kashmir to be allowed to determine their own destiny.
“At this time in Kashmir there are severe shortages of food and water. There are drastic evacuations of non-Muslims from Kashmir. The authorities are transferring large number of prisoners from Kashmir to the much hotter climate of Rajastan, and there are worrying reports that death squads are being formed and trained. As I said earlier, there are reports of substantial extra troop deployments to Kashmir.
“There can be no doubt that what has happened in the Punjab since 1984 scars the reputation of India, the world’s largest democracy, and that the popular uprising in Kashmir threatens peace in the region. All true friends of India—we are all well aware of the deep affection and regard that you, Mr Speaker, have for that country which is shared by many honorable Members—wish every good fortune to Mr Singh and his Government in resolving the vexed and dangerous issues that threaten the future of his Government and, more important, the future and well-being of all the people of all religions of India.
British Govt.’s historic responsibility
“The human rights position in the Punjab and the dangerous position in Kashmir, which seems to be deteriorating fast, call for the British Government to make representations to the Government of India. British have a great historic responsibility for India’s past, and it has a great responsibility now to speak up on behalf of people who have many relatives and friends there. The Kashmiri communities are desperately worried about their families and their friends, and are concerned about the future of their country. Sikhs, too, have great worries. I hope that the Minister will echo their concerns, and will make it clear that the British Government, in the spirit of true friendship, are prepared to make the representations to the Indian Government”.
The PHRO, since then, could not know what specific steps were taken by the British Government to safeguard human rights of the Sikhs and Kashmiris in India.
The CRPF kill 46 Kashmiris
But there is no doubt about the fast deteriorating situation in Punjab and Kashmir. In a shocking incident, the CRPF mowed down 46 unarmed Kashmiris and injured 57 others in Chhota Bazar area of Srinagar on June 11. Prof. Saiffuddin Soz, a former MP from Kashmir, in a letter to the Prime Minister said that the Chhota Bazar incident involved a 12-member group of the CRPF in plain clothes who by their mindless firing made passersby and shopkeepers their victims.
The CRPF’s indiscriminate firing, the Kashmir leader said, was protected by the provisions of the Disturbed Areas Act and the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act. As long as these black laws remained in operation, the atrocities on the people of Kashmir will continue, he said. He pleaded for withdrawal of the CRPF from Kashmir to arrest the deteriorating situation in the State. The Government of India took no action against the CRPF unit for going berserk. Instead, its action was defended in so many ways by Delhi and its spokesman. First, the number of those killed was sought to be minimized by an official spokesman whose versions issued in Srinagar alone find a place in the captive media. The Government of India-controlled PTI and UNI gave the number of deaths as 32 killed and “many injured”. Secondly, the reason for the deaths was given as “cross fire between the security forces and the Kashmir militants after the CRPF unit was allegedly “ambushed”. The report further said that “several militants” were killed. There was no mention of the civilians and unarmed persons who alone were killed, according to later reports emanating from unofficial sources.
A Government of India spokesman at Delhi on June 12 offered no apology for the CRPF action against the civilians and instead, recounted that the Kashmir militants mounted 155 attacks on security forces in May and June. Indirectly the Government defended the CRPF action as something natural in the circumstances.
There were widespread protests against the killings. The people of Srinagar observed a protest strike. There was tension in the town. The government imposed curfew restrictions in most part of the city and armed forces were called out. The government offered to hold an enquiry by the additional chief secretary but the people had no faith in the fairness of the authorities and they decided to boycott the enquiry proceedings.
Mohd Saleem Jan, a 13-year-old apprentice to a mechanic at an automobile workshop in Chhotta Bazar, was seriously injured.
An eye witness account
Having barely escaped death in the shooting by the security forces, Saleem told a group of journalists : “A group of security men came to our workshop around 6.30 p.m. and caught hold of our workshop owner, Abdul Rashid, brushing aside his pleas. I saw them killing four of the workshop men with rifles. I lay down on the floor and sensing imminent death, grabbed the mangled pieces of my master’s body, put it on my head and pretended to be dead. I could hear the security personnel hurling abuses and kicking all the bodies.
Sleem Jan received a bullet injury in his skull. After the security personnel left, he got up and sought help from a residence. He bandaged his head in a sari and walked to the nearby SMHS Hospital.
Jan’s statement was corroborated by numerous other injured admitted to the hospital.
Dr Maqbool Dar, a house surgeon on duty in the civil hospital who was at a roadside stall at the time of the shoot-out, said: “A group of nine CRPF men came in a truck. They caught hold of me and refused to see even my identity card. I was shot at point blank range.” He rushed to the hospital after regaining consciousness. He was hit by a bullet in the neck.
“There was no firing on the patrol party, at least at the spot where I was injured,” he said.
An employee of the hospital, who sought anonymity, claimed that he was eyewitness to the cold-blooded murder of Ghwam Ahmed, a storekeeper of SMHS Hospital, outside which the incident took place.
Among the killed civilians were an old woman and a child, Most of the killed were passersby returning home before curfew hours.
Rajan Bakshi, DIG, Kashmir Range, said that none of the victims was a militant. “All the killed are innocent citizens and that causes us great concern”.
About the sequence of the events, Bakshi said the police itself was bewildered over what exactly had provoked the CRPF personnel to open fire in a dense locality.”
The situation in the entire valley turned volatile with the shootout. The entire downtown area of Srinagar city was placed under curfew and the army deployed all over.
All district headquarters observed a complete bandh in protest against the Chhotta Bazar killings. Angry civilians besieged the police control room late at night to get information about their missing relatives.
The scene of the shootout was splattered with blood and fire brigade tenders were washing the spot when journalists got permission from the Army to go near it in the morning.
Kashmir mourners fired upon
Yet another incident at the hands of the CRPF was investigated by a local human rights group, the Peoples Basic Rights (Protection) Commission (PBRC) headed by Justice Mufti Bahauddin Farooqi, a former Chief Justice of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court.
The “people’s commission of enquiry” set-up, following requests from the public and boycott of the official inquiry commission, in its report, indicted the security forces for opening indiscriminate and unprovoked firing on a procession of mourners in Khanyar on May 8, resulting in death of 16 civilians and injury to at least 59. The report was based on a statement of 40 witnesses and no one appeared before the commission on behalf of the government.
The report was released to the press at Srinagar on June 26 which alleged that on May 8 a patrol party of the CRPF fired the first shot on a mob of about 80,000, which had assembled for the burial of five militants killed in an earlier incident. Thereafter, the CRPF men on duty at the burial ground also joined the patrol party in opening indiscriminate fire on the mourners.
The commission alleged that while the CRPF men continued to fire for 10 minutes, they again opened fire when people returned to the spot to pick up the dead and injured inspite of the loud pleading of the local police officials.
Contesting the government claim that the CRPF patrol party had been fired upon by someone in the crowd the report asked how was it possible that no one from the security forces was even injured.
“Fifteen Kashmiris are being killed everyday”
About the motive behind the firing, the report said the government did not relish the support shown by the congregation at Khanyar for the militants and the movement for the Kashmir’s right to self-determination, symbolized by them”.
Justice Farooqi said the commission was likely to take up another inquiry into the June 11 firing on innocent people in the Chhotta Bazar area in Srinagar in response to public pressure.
Justice Farooqi said the commission had filed habeas corpus petitions for the release of at least 100 innocent youths who had been unauthorisedly arrested, in the state High Court. Besides charging the security forces with Indiscriminate firing on mourners, Justice Farooqi said the security forces killed on an average 15 Kashmiris a day. He also charged the security forces with rape, arson, looting and indiscriminate arrests and torture to the unauthorisedly detained persons.
The PHRO had earlier investigated the massacre of the mourners at Srinagar on May 21, 1990 by the CRPF following the assassination of Mirwaiz Maulvi. The report, a 45-page book-let “The Kashmir Massacre”, alleged that May 21 firing by the CRP F was not only totally unprovoked, brutal and inspired by communal passion but was pre-planned in which dozens of Kashmiri Muslims were killed and over 100 injured.
Jagmohan’s description of Kashmir Muslims
The then Governor Jagmohan described Kashmiri Muslims as “a gang of terrorists worth eliminating” to “save Kashmir for India”. In light of these remarks, the PHRO called upon the world opinion to react strongly to New Delhi’s cruel strategy of punishing Kashmiri masses for their political views.
The US State Department reacted strongly and Jagmohan was withdrawn immediately by the then VP Singh Government.
What difference does Jagmohan’s recall from Kashmir make to the situation ? Jagmohan, after all, was implementing “a policy” set out by the Government of India. That was, in effect, the policy drafted by intelligence agencies, a policy of brutal suppression. Must that policy remain in tact ?
What is, therefore, required is not a new Governor for Kashmir and Punjab but a new policy for them, a new deal for them a deal that must meet the aspirations of the people of these regions and nations.
All this presupposes the dawn of statesmanship. That statesmanship, alas, is a scare commodity in today’s India. What abounds in India is low cunning and high handedness, and the fast evolution of a high-caste, high-finance militarized fascist state that must of necessity suppress all forms of dissent raised by minorities and minority regions and now by other democratic elements including the Press.
Harassment of editors and other journalists and seizure and destruction of newspapers have become a routine affair in India.
Kashmir journalists in detention
Fifty members of Kashmir Journalists Association and Kashmir Editors Conference were arrested on June 21 at Srinagar when they tried to hold a sit-in to protest against “anti-Press policies” of the Kashmir government, according to a report from New Delhi.
The police earlier cordoned off the houses of journalists to prevent them from holding the sit-in but they managed to reach the central telegraph office with banners. They shouted slogans against the government policies. Later all the journalists were released.
In Chandigarh the police confiscated thousands of copies of the Times of India, a leading national daily, and Jan Satta, a Hindi daily of the Indian Express chain of newspapers for carrying news regarding the activities of Punjab militants. Surprisingly, according to Jan Satta management, the newspaper was allowed to be circulated in Punjab but not in the Union Territory of Chandigarh, directly administered by the government of India, PHRO president Sukhdev Singh reported from Chandigarh.
The crackdown on the Press
The copies of the Times of India were seized because it carried a news item stating that wall posters had appeared at Ludhiana warning the public against casting votes in the elections which were subsequently postponed by the Government of India, the Chandigarh report added.
Similarly, thousands of copies of Ajit and Aj Di Awaaz were also seized by the police which contained militants statements on the current political affairs.
The managing editor of the daily Ajit, Barjinder Singh, in a legal notice to the Punjab Home Secretary said that the Ajit had occasionally been high-lighting the shortcomings
of the government and its machinery much to the chagrin of the concerned officials, who in the recent past had been threatening the management with grave consequences. Barjinder Singh charged the Government with trying to lock LIP Ajit under a conspiracy and said, “that is why it is attacking the newspaper, repeatedly”. He affirmed that ‘ the Ajit will stand firm on its policy and not succumb to any type of pressure”. And as a protest the editor on March 20, 1991 returned the Padamshree, the honour conferred upon him, by the President of India.
About 100 journalists representing almost all national and regional newspapers and news agencies on March 4, 1991 staged a silent dharna (sit-in) in front of Punjab Raj Bhavan at Chandigarh to protest against the undeclared censorship imposed on the Press by the Punjab Government.
The meeting adopted three resolutions. In the first resolution, it noted with deep concern the current onslaught on the Press in the region.
It noted with shock and anger the seizure of the newspaper Ajit on February 27 and again on March 4, Aj Di Awaaz on March 4, the seizure of copies of The Hindu dated February 28, institution of a case under TADA against the Times of India and Ajit, and the two earlier raids on The Tribune and one on Indian Express and Jansatta as well as threats held out to individual journalists.
Newsmen protest against censorship
The attempted curbs on newspapers came as a culmination of similar attacks on other democratic institutions in the state. All representatives of democratic bodies have been sent packing for years now. TADA has restricted people’s access to the courts of law. The executive in the process has become desensitised. Now the Press, the only surviving institution of democracy, has come under attack.
Needless to say, this was an extremely unhappy situation for any newspaper to find itself in and unacceptable to the community of newspaper employees. The meeting readily accepted the fact that the freedom of expression is not totally unfettered but to impose indirect censorship in this form cuts at the very roots of the free press and its capacity to be the clearing house of news and information.
Besides seizing thousands of copies of the non-conforming newspapers, a number of journalists were marked, threats held out and in some cases their houses were raided and searched. Editor of the monthly, “Janatak Bulaara”, published from Jalandhar, was arrested on June 1 to silence his voice.
The Ropar police registered a case under TADA against a correspondent of the Tribune, Harish Chander for filing a report about the boycott of the proposed elections to Parliament and Punjab Assembly. The case was registered with the approval of the state government, according to the district police chief, Mohammad Mustafa.
Roop Tara, a press correspondent from Tanda in Hoshiarpur district, was also harassed. He was kept in illegal custody by the Tanda police on June 8. He was slapped by the S.H.O. During a whole night’s detention he was threatened n -it to highlight the killings by the police.
The reporter was victimised because he filed a story on June 1 regarding two fake encounters by the police in which three Sikh youths were gunned down. According to the story published in a section of the press, Dasuya police shot dead a militant on March 19, 1991 in a stagemanaged encounter near Kularan village. The militant was already in the police custody. Similarly, Tanda police killed in cold blood two Sikh youths on May 25, 1991 near Kandhala village at night. They were picked up by the police from Jaja village earlier in the day in full view of the public.
The Press suppressed
PHRO described the onslaught on the Press as a part of the Government of India’s multi-pronged offensive against Punjab which included “no criticism of the security forces’ excesses”.
It should be fairly admitted that the Indian security forces are increasingly getting alienated from the Sikh, Kashmiri, Tamil and Assamese nations who are urging political
reforms to satisfy their national aspirations. But Indian Government is determined to suppress them by the most brutal use of armed force. The Indian state is pressing into its service such organisations with certain amount of credibility as the Press Council of India (PCI) to whitewash the security forces’ atrocities.
The case in point is a report of the PCI on certain incidents of rape in Kashmir. The PCI, of course, cannot convince the world public opinion about the innocence of India’s armed forces. More similar attempts will only further discredit the PCI and its managers. What has this organisation to say of the armed forces’ behaviour towards the Sikh women of Sangha village in Amritsar district on May 25–27. 1991 ? Will it call the allegations of rape as concoction in this case, too ? And what has the PCI to say about the Army Brigadier R P. Sinha’s remarks, who haughtily warned the sarpanches (mayors) and other village leaders that if there was any militant violence in these villages “all male members will be killed” and the women taken to army camps “to breed a new race” loyal to Delhi.
The coordination committee on Kashmir, representing 16 organisations, dubbed as highly misleading and one-sided the report of the Press Council of India on Kashmir which exonerrated the army of all charges in the Poshpura outrage case. According to the coordination committee chairman, Justice V.
- Tarkunde, the council’s report entitled “Kashmir crisis and credibility” consisted of “broad generalities on the basis of defective investigation into only two or three instances of excesses alleged to have been committed by army personnel.”
Press Council of India censured by Tarkunde
“Even that part of the Press Council committee’s report which deals with the alleged army excesses is heavily one-sided. It reads like a special pleading for the army,” Tarkunde said.
He said his observation was based on a report of the sub-committee appointed by the coordination committee on Kashmir which consisted of persons who had visited Jammu and Kashmir after January 1990 on behalf of various human rights bodies.
Apart from Tarkunde, the other sub-committee members consisted of Amrik Singh, Inder Mohan, Dinesh Mohan and
N.D. Pancholi, all human rights activists.
The Delhi-based coordination committee on Kashmir has raised serious doubts about the credibility of the conclusions drawn by the Press Council of India in its report on the Kashmir crisis.
The committee particularly flayed that part of the report which refers to the human rights violations committed by the armed forces in Kashmir. The report was submitted by a three member committee at the behest of the Press Council of India,
