On November, 29, 1991 members of the British House of Parliament discussed the current situation of Sikhs in the Punjab. The issue of home rule and human rights violations was the topics as well as their relationship between the British Government and the Indian Commonwealth. The debate was initiated by Mr. Terry Dicks with Mr. Jacques Arnold and Mr. Tristan Garel Jones: the Minister of State Foreign and Commonwealth offering further comments.
The following are excerpts and analysis of the debate.
Mr. Dicks: I want to mention yet again in the House the persecution of Sikhs in the Punjab. Sikhs throughout the world have been concerned for the safety of family and friends living in the Punjab. The rape of young women the beating of old men and the murder of young boys to say nothing of the imprisonment without trial of many thousands of innocent people has been going on since 1984 and continues unabated. Indian security forces are killing hundreds of innocent Sikhs in faked encounters and there is evidence that those forces have swept through villages in the Punjab intent on nothing less than widespread slaughter.
All those activities are taking place under the umbrella of Presidents rule which in effect means direct rule from Delhi. That regime fives the security forces the unfettered power to take whatever action they wish against people living in the state of Punjab.
Investigations into allegations of police torture are rare. When such allegations have been established prosecutions have not taken place. According to Amnesty International no police officer has ever been convicted of committing human rights violations in the Punjab.
Legal safeguards for the protection of human rights do not apply to those arrested under special legislation relating to national security. Detainees in the Punjab are arrested under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act (TADA) which allows detention without trial for a year the burden of proof being placed on the accused to prove his innocence.
The legislation imposes a minimum of five years imprisonment on anyone convicted of terrorist or disruptive activities. Disruptive activities (according to the way TADA is enforced) include the peaceful expression of views which question the sovereignty or territorial integrity of India or support any claim for independence.
The Indian Government is conducting a similar campaign of oppression against the Muslim community in the part of Kashmir occupied illegally by Indian security forces. The legitimate call y Muslims living in Kashi for self-determination is being denied with a brutality that should be condemned by the civilized world but unfortunately is not.
Parliament has refused to condemn atrocities carried out by the Indian Government no matter how well documented they are by Amnesty International-the Government because of its friendship with India as a Commonwealth country and the Labor party because of its close relationship with the Indian Party Congress and the Gandhi family in particular. Actions of this kind condemned elsewhere have been ignored in India.
Successive Indian Governments either under the control or influence of the Congress party have claimed for themselves the role of governing the world’s largest democracy. Unfortunately many Governments around the world seem prepared to accept the claim. It is far easier to accept the mask worn by the Indian Government as the true face of India today than 0 ask awkward questions about the plight of many thousands of Indian citizens who seek nothing more than to have their rights and religion recognized. To quote an old adage there are none so blind as those who will not see.
How can Governments who went to war to defend the rights of the Kuwaitis in their own country refuse to bring pressure on the Indian Government to recognize the rights of the Sikhs in the Punjab? Are the Kuwaitis more important than the Sikhs? Or can be that much of the world’s oil comes from the Middle East but only the food that feeds millions of hungry mouths in India is produced in the Punjab? That may be cynical question but it demands an answer.
As have often said the British Government has a unique responsibility in this matter. In 1947 when India obtained its independence it was the British who accepted a guarantee by the Hindus who make up 84% of the population that the self-determination of the Sikhs in the Punjab would be recognized. On that basis the British Government granted India its independence. Unfortunately for the Sikhs the British Government has done nothing to enforce the guarantee and successive Congress party dominated Indian Governments have been able to ignore the pledge.
The refusal of the Indian Government aided and abetted by Britain to keep their word has led the Sikh people to call for their own independent state. Unfortunately as happens in many groups some extremists have used the situation for their own ends. Their approach has enabled the Indian government to confuse the situation and give the impression that their fight in the Punjab against a handful of terrorists is in realty fight for democracy against an-arehy. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The majorities of Sikhs both inside and outside India are opposed to violence in any form and want through the democratic process only that to which they feel they were entitled namely self-determination. What they were guaranteed in 1947 they must be entitled to some 44 years later and he Indian Government would do well to recognize that fact.
What the Sikhs want now above I is for the rest of the world to recognize that suffering that they have to endure in their own country. They would like to see pressure brought to bear upon the Indian Government to bring an end to this oppression. The abuse of human rights cannot be condoned no matter whether it takes place in a Middle Eastern country or a country that belongs to the Commonwealth. Nor can the actions of a handful of extremists be used as a excuse for the oppression of a religious minority in the name of democracy. The concept of good government has now been introduced in relation to the British aid program. As {understand it from now on only those governments who recognize basic human rights and allow freedom of speech in a democratic setting will qualify for aid. I hope that this new approach will be brought firmly to the attention of the Indian Government who at the present receives more than 100 million British pounds annually in overseas aid.
If the British Government were to take a tough stand on the abuse of human rights in India and persuade the Indian Government to recognize the right of the Sikhs in the Punjab feel certain that the majority of Sikhs throughout the world would be prepared to renounce violence of a method of achieving their objective of self-determination and would welcome the opportunity to meet with anyone in an international forum in an attempt to come to a peaceful settlement of the problem.
Mr. Garel-Jones: There can be no dispute about the Governments attachment to that principle (the renouncing of violence) and the fact that serious abuses of human rights such as summary execution arbitrary imprisonment and torture wherever they may occur all deserve and obtain the repudiation of the House. Honorable Members can rest assured that the British Government will continue to press for the strongest respect for human rights throughout the world. The House and the British people expect nothing less from us.
My honorable Friends will understand however that we must judge carefully just how much prominence to give to: human rights issues in our relationships with other governments sometimes with a friendly Government that makes for hard choices. I we had dealings only with countries with impeccable human rights records our influence in the world would be significantly reduced and there would almost certainly be a consequent loss of jobs in this country.
An important element in Britain’s excellent bilateral relations with India is the many contacts at all levels between our two countries There are about 800000 people of Indian origin in this country and they play a vital part in that relationship. The Sikhs many of whom live in the British constituencies are the largest group among them totaling about 300000 people.
The Asian community in Britain makes an important and much valued contribution to many aspects of our national life as i now from my constituency and the vast majority of them are industrious and law-abiding and are increasingly making as we can say from our experience in all of our constituencies a significant and increasingly important contribution to the life of the country.
Article extracted from this publication >> January 31, 1992
