come together to form a solidarity on the Punjab disappearances and illegal
cremations case. The matter is before the National Human Rights Commission
(NHRC) where it has been pending for 6 years. The case has finally reached the
stage where the State of Punjab will begin to file its response.
Two meetings of the Solidarity group have been held so far. We have decided
to initiate a process of ‘solidarity campaign’ in support of the quest for
justice by the families of the disappeared. This is an appeal to invite you to
join us in this campaign.
BACKGROUND TO THE CASE
The Committee for Information and Initiative in Punjab (CIIP) has been
involved in documenting accounts of State repression and human rights abuse
and disappearances since 1988. In 1994-95, Jaswant Singh Khalra and Ram
Narayan Kumar investigated the records of 3 cremation grounds in the district
of Amritsar. From a preliminary survey they discovered that the police had
cremated over 2000 bodies at these three grounds by labelling them as
unidentified/ unclaimed, even though in many cases the names and addresses of
those cremated were entered in the records. The cause of death in most cases
was stated to be “bullet” (or firearm) injury or, simply, “encounter”. This
finding when juxtaposed with the fact that over 2000 people, on a rough
estimate, had disappeared at the hands of the security forces in Amritsar
district, was clearly of enormous significance.
Based on these findings the CIIP filed a petition before the Supreme Court
under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, to demand an investigation into
the patterns of disappearances and secret cremations throughout Punjab. The
initial scepticism of the Supreme Court was overcome by producing the
affidavit of Baldev Singh whose son, Pargat Singh, had disappeared. Baldev
Singh’s search for his disappeared son led him to reach the city cremation
ground just as his son’s pyre was lit by the police. He pulled off the burning
logs with his hands and identified his son’s bullet riddled body. Yet, the
police insisted on cremating Pargat Singh as an unidentified/ unclaimed body.
The court issued notices were issued to the State of Punjab and the concerned
police officers of Amritsar district.
Soon after, Jaswant Singh Khalra, who had been under threat for some time,
disappeared on 6 September 1995. A Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI)
inquiry, ordered by the Supreme Court, established that he had been
disappeared by officers of the Punjab police acting on orders of the then
Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Tarn Taran police district in
Amritsar, Ajit Singh Sandhu.
In the words of Justice Kuldip Singh, CBI’s investigation into the matter of
police cremations disclosed “flagrant violations of human rights on a mass
scale”. The December 1996 report by the CBI showed 2097 illegal cremations at
three cremation grounds of Amritsar district. Of these, the CBI identified
583, partially identified 276 and failed to identify 1238. The court referred
the “whole matter” to the NHRC for further investigation and adjudication.
The matter has been pending before the NHRC since January 1997. In August
1997, the NHRC declared that in this case it was vested with all the powers of
the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. The NHRC also
indicated that it intended to look into cases of disappearance from all over
Punjab. The Government of India challenged this decision of the NHRC before
the Supreme Court, which upheld the NHRC’s decision in September 1998.
Inexplicably, in January 1999, the NHRC reversed its earlier stand and
declared that it would restrict itself to investigate illegal, secret
cremations at the three cremation grounds in the CBI’s report. No amount of
argument or reasoning could persuade the NHRC to see the discrimination and
absurdity inherent in its position. Compounding the illogic, the NHRC decided
to only entertain claims of people who could swear on oath that their kin had
been cremated at one of the three cremation grounds. Apart from everything
else, this condition was untenable with respect to ‘disappearances’ since, the
family of a disappeared person could, only assert to police abduction leading
to the disappearance. The CIIP’s petition for a review of this order was
rejected by the NHRC. The Supreme Court also rejected its plea for an
intervention.
The flaws in the viewpoint adopted by the NHRC led it to scale down the scope
of its inquiry from 2097 illegal cremations in 3 cremation grounds to 88
claims that it had received from families in Punjab. These claims were
received in response to the public notice issued by the NHRC in January 1999
that required each claimant to swear on oath that their disappeared kin had
been cremated at one of the 3 cremation grounds of Amritsar mentioned above.
The State of Punjab further categorized these claims into three groups. The
first group of 23 claims was deemed to be outside the jurisdiction of the NHRC
as they pertained to cremations in other districts. The second group of 47
cases was claimed to comprise of “disputed” cases, in which the State of
Punjab asserted its right to contest the claims. In the last group of 18
cases, the State of Punjab expressed its willingness to compensate the next of
kin with Rs 100,000 each, without going into the merits of the cases and
without “admitting” its liability in any manner. By its order of 18th August
2000, the NHRC appeared to endorse this stand. Thus between January 1999 and
August 2000, the scope of the matter was reduced from several thousand
disappearances in the whole of Punjab to 18 cases in the district of Amritsar,
to be compensated on a “no fault” basis.
All 18 persons rejected this offer. They insisted that their claims to the
NHRC were based on an expectation of justice and should not be construed as a
plea for charity. Embarrassed by the adverse publicity the NHRC, in February
2001, changed its position again to cover all the 2097 cremations.
In September 2002 the NHRC, holding that the State of Punjab is liable to
rebut the presumption of guilt against it, directed it to file replies in each
of the 583 cases of “identified” cremations, based on the CBI investigations.
The next date before the NHRC is 21st November 2002.
WHY SOLIDARITY IS IMPORTANT
The struggle for justice by the families of the disappeared has been long and
lonely. Before the NHRC the families of the disappeared are represented only
by the CIIP. Since the CIIP comprises of just a few persons, its lawyer, is
usually the only person present in court on its behalf. On the other hand, the
State of Punjab and the Punjab police officers have a battery of lawyers and
officials present during the hearings. Much as we would like to think that
justice is impervious to such impressions, we believe that this fact does make
a difference. The impression that the Punjab matter is a dead horse being
flogged by a handful of busybodies should be countered. Thousands of family
members of the disappeared are keenly watching the proceeding before the NHRC.
Many would wish to attend the hearings but are too poor to travel to Delhi.
With years of legal wrangling and interminable delays, the waning of public
interest is understandable. The delays are part of the State repertoire for
defeating claims for justice by citizens and groups. We believe, however, that
there can be no progress towards the end of impunity unless we make it clear
that mere passage of time will not make us lose interest in the issue.
What you can do:
1. Join us! - If you want to be a partner in this campaign, kindly write
back to us confirming your participation.
2. Attend hearings: It is very important that people who support the demand
for justice and accountability attend hearings before the NHRC.
3. Help families of the disappeared to attend hearings: We propose that a
small fund is created to pay for about 25 family members to travel from
Amritsar to Delhi to attend each hearing. This would include arranging for an
overnight stay and food for one day.
4. Initiating a debate: The hearings before the NHRC and the visits of the
kin of the disappeared to attend these hearings should be used to help
initiate a debate on the issue of impunity. The first hand accounts of the
visitors from Punjab can be helpful in starting such a debate.
This appeal is sent out on behalf of:
Ram Narayan Kumar, Amrik Singh, Ashok Agrwaal, Priya Jain, Tapan Bose, Anita
Abraham, Satish Jain (CIIP)
Deenadayalan (TOM)
Patwant Singh
Vrinda Grover
Seema Misra
Usha Ramanathan
John Dayal
Naraz Katwal, Venkatesh Naik (CHRI)
N.D.Pancholi (CFD)
Gam Shimray (AICFAIP)
E Joyson (NPMHR)
Shewli Kumar
Contact Addresses:
The Committee for Information and Initiative in Punjab (CIIP)
56 Todarmal Road, New Delhi 110 001 Tel: 2371 4531
Email:
punjabsolidarityindia@yahoo.co.uk ashokagrwaal@vsnl.com mailto: ashokagrwaal@vsnl.com>, pjain58@yahoo.co.uk The Other Media
B-14 (S.F), Gulmohar Park, New Delhi - 110 049, Tel: 6561743
Email:
admin@del3.vsnl.net.in 
URL::