The Honorable S.B. Chavan Minister of Home Affairs Government of India Ottawa, October 25, 1994

If the Indian Government is sincere in its desire to curb and eventually eliminate human rights the following actions must be taken:

1) Dismantle the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act and the Armed Forces Act. Which were implemented in India during Emergency in 1975. These two Acts have allowed the police to use brutal and coercive force on the citizens of India without fear of reprisal. Amend all other legislative acts that restrict the rights of individuals as set out by international law. 2) Allow Amnesty International and other such organizations free and unsupervised access to investigate human rights violations in India crimes during the 1984 Delhi riots in 3) Bring to justice those who committed which thousands Sikhs were killed and many more were injured and senior officials of the Congress Party took part. This October 31st marks a decade since the riots took place to date no actions have been taken against the main offenders despite the fact that many of them are high profile and there whereabouts is well known.

4) A full judicial inquiry into the deaths of all individuals killed by police and/or under police custody, investigate impartially all allegations of torture and deaths in custody and bring to justice those responsible for torturing or ill-treating prisoners. 5) Establish an effective international tribunal designed to study and address the human rights violations in Punjab, Jammu, Kashmir, Manipur, Nagaland and any other states currently experiencing human rights abuses.

6) Implement the 14 point program recommended by Amnesty International to halt torture.

7) Release all prisoners of conscience and ensure that all other prisoners are brought to trial promptly and fairly.

8) Drop all restrictions currently placed. politicians and community leaders on travel both within and outside India by ensuring that they are given fair access to passports and other travel documents. 9) The present government of Punjab does not have a truly legitimate mandate. given that only 10% of Punjab’s elector ate voted in the last election. The Indian government must hold a referendum that will allow people to vote freely and vote their conscience to determine the future of Punjab.

Herb Dhaliwal MP Vancouver South

Editor’s Note: The above is an excerpt of a letter written by Vancouver MP-Herb Dhaliwal to Indian Home Minister S.B. Chavan during his visit to Canada last year. The response of Mr. V.K. Jain, Special Secretary in the Ministry of Home affairs of India follows verbatim-

Herb Dhallwal, M.P.. House of Commons Ottawa, Ont. Canada New Delhi, February 15, 1995 Dear Shri Dhallwal,

This refers to your letter dated October 25, 1994 which you had presented to the Honorable Home Minister of India during his visit to Ottawa.

You will recall that the main thrust of your presentation had already been covered in the Home Minister’s detailed re- marks at the Round Table discussion in Ottawa on October 25 and at which you were very much present. Nevertheless, by way of answering your letter, I may offer the following few comments.

India is not only a signatory to the United Nations Charter of Human Rights but is an active champion of human rights, both within its own territory and outside. The provisions of our Constitution which en- shrine the Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens provide the bedrock to this commitment.

Further, the Indian system- an independent judiciary, a vibrant, free and an alert press, a vigilant public opinion and our own National Human Rights Commission and a transparent democratic process- provide adequate guarantees to our citizens in respect of their human rights.. In your letter addressed to the Honorable Home Minister, it is noticed that virtually all your observations are based on the testimony of an organization like Amnesty International. While you are welcome to have such total faith in such an organization, I regret to point out that our own experience with the Amnesty Inter- national has been quite different and disappointing Our Home Minister himself was at pains to explain this on several occasions during his recent visit to Canada and at least on one such occasion you were yourself present.

If Amnesty International decides to document any complaint that is referred to it by anyone without even caring to verify it. much less to give the other side even time enough to enquire and respond, then, I am afraid, both its credibility and motives become suspect. On several occasions we have had to point out to Amnesty International that in the interest of preserving its own credibility it should be careful about not letting itself be used, or rather abused, as a forum for known extremists and terrorists. Regrettably, Amnesty International has rarely displayed this caution and increasingly gives the impression of having been hijacked by extremist elements and terrorists. As regards the authenticity or the correctness of its reports, one recent example snoua surrice, uncover of its November December 1994 issue of the magazine Amnesty published by the Rights Group’s British Sector, it described a South Indian Woman as a “Kashmiri woman in mourning” and claimed that some pictures from Kashmir it published were the first ever. When pointed out, this blatant distortion was too much even for the Amnesty International to deny and they had to admit that the woman pictured on the cover page was a Tamil Muslim visiting a shrine and not a Kashmiri woman as stated in the photo caption. Since you obviously very closely and regularly follow the activities of Amnesty International, I hope this blatant and mischievous inaccuracy was also noticed by you.

While on the question of human rights, I would like to pose a counter question to all those who claim to be the champions of human rights. How often, if at all, have they spoken out against acts of terrorism resulting in immense loss of property and. even more serious, the loss of innocent lives. Sadly, the impression very often to emerge is, as though according to the so- called champions of human rights, only terrorists and extremists have human rights and not their innocent victims. Such one sided presentation might suit the designs of such organizations but give no comfort to the victims of terrorism nor do they carry any conviction. In this context, I regret to point out that even your own letter under reference is patently incomplete and one sided in this respect. I wonder if you are aware of the size and magnitude of militant violence in Punjab. From 1981 to 1994 a total of 11,677 persons have been killed by the militants. This includes 1719 officers of the police force, nine Judges, 58 media men, 27 candidates, (for Parliament/State Assembly) 250 members of policemen’s families and 816 political activists. This also includes various cases of mass murders where per- sons were killed either travelling in buses/ trains or participating in fairs/in activities or just happened to be present on a busy street at a peak, commercial hour-there- are over 151 incidents in which 1202 persons were killed.

It may also be pointed out that no responsible Government anywhere can possibly abdicate its duty and responsibility to protect the lives and property of its citizens and preserve the unity and territorial integrity of its country. Our own priority in is respect is very close to us and we have no intention of abandoning this path just because of highly misplaced criticism from certain quarters, various people refer to certain special laws that we have had to pass in the past and which are still in force. What they conveniently overlook and for- get is that those special laws were necessitated by an extraordinary and dangerous situation facing the country. As long as the situation warrants such laws have to remain in force but once the situation changes for the better our own system is mature and responsive enough to modify them or withdraw them completely. We do not need homilies from others on how to run the affairs of our state. I may hasten to add that India is not an exception to this and if you were to look around you will find any number of examples of countries, including acknowledged democracies, who have acted similarly when faced with such a situation. I am also constrained to point out that even under the much as- signed TADA, police have to produce the accused within 24 hours before a Magistrate, who gives the initial remand: for any detention beyond this period, orders are passed by a designated court presided over by a District and Sessions Judge. An analysis of judicial relief, review and red ressal, bail was given in over 60% of the detentions made.

Towards the end of your letter, you at most demand action on nine points listed therein. I am constrained to point out that we are not given to accepting such dictation as regards our internal affairs. Just to comment on your point No. 9, it was painful and surprising to note that you have questioned the very legitimacy of the present duly elected Government in Punjab. True, when the last elections were held in Punjab to its Legislative Assembly, due to the fear of the gun, the voter turn out was not as much as we would have liked it to be. Out of a total electorate of 13 million, only 3.5 million voted. Which averages to about 25% of the electorate, but within months, the same Government decided to hold elections to the municipal and the village councils. The voter turn out in the Municipal elections was 70% and the Panchayat (village council) elections was 80%. It is important to note that in all those elections, not only the Congress, but also the BJP, the Communists, SAD(B), SAD(Mann) group, SAD (Amritsar) group participated, and, at the after of the Ballot Box, the extremists/ militant factions of the Akalies were considerably marginalized. As a matter of fact, in the Jallundhar parliamentary by elections, the candidates put up by SAD (Mann), Justice (retd) A.S. Bains, not only lost but also forfeited his deposit. At the two by-elections held for the State Assembly at Ajnala and Nakuda the Congress (1) and SAD (Badal) candidates won respectively and the candidates put up by the Sikh extremists were soundly defeated. Please don’t ignore or overlook such facts just because they don’t suit your thesis. You then go on to suggest the holding of are freedom in Punjab. May I inform you that there is no such provision in our Constitution which otherwise allows the people of the land to freely express their wishes through periodic elections? The affairs of India are subject to the provisions of our own Constitution and not the whims and fancies of certain individuals.. Such suggestions are not only an insult to our Constitution and to the duly elected. Government of one of our constituent states but also a blatant interference in our internal affairs. This is clearly not acceptable. May I therefore advise you to be cautious and restrained while offering your advice and comments, more so since you currently hold a responsible position not only as a Member of the Federal Parliament but also in the Federal Government as one of it’s Parliamentary Secretaries? We highly value our friendly relations with Canada and I would like to believe that the contents of your letter under reference represent strictly your views as an individual and not those of the Government of Canada. Nevertheless, I would advise caution and restraint on your part lest you unwillingly become instrumental in causing avoidable and totally unnecessary misunderstanding in the otherwise friendly and cooperative relations between our two countries.

V.K. Jain

Special Secretary Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi.

Article extracted from this publication >>  March 24, 1995