Another example of the Gandhi government’s callousness toward human rights is the federal government’s mid-May takeover of the Punjab State. The Punjab is an area of unrest and political and religious violence, most of it based loosely on tensions and differing political aspirations between the Sikhs and the Hindus, (Sikhism is the majority religion in the Punjab, but a minority religion in India as a whole. In 1981, there were approximately 13 million Sikhs in India, 550 million Hindus, 76 million Moslems, 16 million Christians, and 5 million Buddhists). The manner in which the overwhelmingly Hindu government has chosen to deal with the situation makes impartial observes skeptical of the government’s good faith.

In Mid-May the Gandhi government ousted the state government of the Punjab and took direct control of the State for a period of at least six months. The official reason given by the Indian government for this action was to stem what the government described as a wave of violence headed by Sikh separatists who hope to turn Punjab into an independent nation called “Khalistan”. The Gandhi government thus claims that its direct control of the Punjab is justified. But it is difficult for ousted observers to reach an informed opinion because the government has taken extreme steps to prevent outside observers from obtaining independent information. No foreign journalists, diplomats, human rights monitoring organizations or private citizens are allowed into Punjab. Thus, there is no reliable independent confirmation of the level of violence in the Punjab or of its nature.

The government is strict about its ban of all foreigners (including diplomats) from the Punjab (unless they have, in the words of an official at India Tourist Office in New York, a “very good reason” such as family or property there). Offenders are prosecuted. In June 1984 Associated Press reporter Brahma Challany filed a report after witnessing the murder of 14 bound Sikh youths by government attack not he Golden Temple, the holiest shrine of the Sikh people. When Challany tried to file his report with the Associated Press, he was arrested by the Indian government and charged with sedition.

Some independent information  about the nature of the Indian federal government’s role in Punjab is available. It was reported in the May 9, 1987 edition of the British newsweekly The Economist, for example, that at least 260 Sikhs have been held in detention in a Jodhpur jail by the government since 1984 without official charges being made against them. The Economist makes no substantial recommendations for setting tensions in the Punjab permanently, but does suggest that tensions in the Punjab can be at least partially assuaged if Rajiv Gandhi shows increased concern for Auman rights in the Punjab by:

  1. Releasing the 360 Sikhs.
  2. Punishing those (including, if guilty, cabinet ministers, police officials, and workers in Gandhi’s Congress (I) Party) who organized the 1984 Delhi riots in which many thousands of Sikhs were killed;
  3. Pardoning Sikh soldiers who deserted their units in what The Economist calls the “emotional aftermath” of Indira Gandhi’s raid on the Sikhs’ Golden Temple, for humanitarian reasons alone, Rajiv Gandhi should consider these steps even if The Economist is wrong that tensions can be measurably reduced if he shows increased concern for human rights. Unfortunately, such concern has yet to be manifest.

No outside observer doubts that the situation inside the Punjab is tense and extremely complex. What is doubtful, however, is whether the Gandhi government’s harsh measures in the Punjab are called for. If the government believes it has a solid case, it should permit visitors especially journalists, human rights monitoring groups and diplomats into the region. If the activities of the federal government in the Punjab are truly justified, foreign observers and journalists will surely confirm this. As long as the government refuses to do so, outsiders will remain skeptical of the sincerity of the government’s claims.

Article extracted from this publication >>  June 26, 1987