Can Kashmiris defeat Indian claims in an International Court of Law??

Following is a series of statements from reputed International personalities

Quote :

U.S. public advocacy attorney Karen Parker, a specialist in human rights and humanitarian law. Karen Parker reports regularly at the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva and its Subcommission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. Her legal arguments are frequently cited by UN officials and included in the final drafts of resolutions. According to many observers, Karen can be counted among the most skilled humanitarian advocates on the international scene today. Her recommendations have led to the adoption of key resolutions by the United Nations, the appointment of special rapporteurs, and the extension of human rights law into new areas such as the environment and disability. Her “six-prong test” for determining whether or not economic sanctions violate human rights and humanitarian law was adopted by the UN Special Rapporteur on Sanctions in his report to the Commission on Human Rights in August, 2000. She is the chief U.N. delegate of International Educational Development - Humanitarian Law Project, an accredited nongovernmental organization (NGO) which advocates on behalf of the victims of war, human rights abuses, and the denial of self-determination to ethnic nationalities worldwide, and which is in consultative status with the United Nations. She is the founder of the Association for Humanitarian Lawyers which among other research and campaign activities, provides emergency funding for human rights activists and attorneys in various countries to attend UN meetings in Geneva. She has also served as the senior UN representative for Disabled Peoples International, specializing in the area of disability rights, including issues arising from armed conflicts.

In relation to Kashmir, after dispatching several human rights monitors to conduct a long-term investigation, Karen wrote a legal analysis on The Situation in Kashmir, published by none other than the UN Subcommission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. Several briefing papers followed, the latest issued in the spring of 1996. Karen Parker is therefore an ideal human rights observer to turn to if we wish to comprehend the UN’s interpretation of the Kashmir dispute.

In their fourth annual review of armed conflict around the world compiled as a report for both the Humanitarian Law Project of International Educational Development and the British Parliamentary Human Rights Group, Parker describes the Kashmir dispute as follows: “The situation in Kashmir is a war of national liberation in exercise of the right to self-determination.” She goes on to record the history of the dispute and its ongoing ramifications:

During British colonial rule, Britain ‘sold’ Kashmir to a Hindu warlord. At the time of the British withdrawal, the predominantly Muslim Kashmiris were given the option of joining India or Pakistan. Before an election could be held, the Maharajah Hari Singh, a Hindu, asked India for assistance in quelling the aspirations for independence and in return signed an instrument of accession to join India. Indian troops seized much of Jammu and Kashmir and Kashmiris have resisted their rule since that time. Part of Kashmir is under Pakistani influence (called Azad Kashmir) and part is now under Chinese control. The war, however, is limited to Indian-occupied Kashmir. In 1948 and 1949 the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan, which was formed by the Security Council, adopted resolutions mandating a ceasefire, the withdrawal of troops, and a plebiscite to determine the will of the people. Subsequent resolutions have reaffirmed the right of the Kashmiri people to chose their future form of governance, but the plebiscite has never been held. In 1972 the Simla Agreement was signed by both India and Pakistan countries and committed them to reach a ‘final settlement’ on the issue, but this has yet to happen. The crisis in Indian-occupied Kashmir has worsened since 1990 due to escalating pressures for the plebiscite and increasing Indian military presence to quell independence movements. As of January 1997, troops are said to number more than 600,000 (estimates vary from 600,000 to 800,000). Fact-finding missions to Indian-controlled Kashmir verify a widespread pattern of human rights and humanitarian law violations. Captured Kashmiri fighters are killed without trial and civilians are tortured and raped. Estimates place deaths between 1990-1997 at more than 20,000, mainly civilians.[42]

As thus noted by Michael Kolodner:

What makes the Indian control of Kashmir a military occupation, and unjustifiable even in comparison with other international absurdities, are India’s actions over the last half-century. In their attempt to maintain control over Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian government has been anti-democratic, arbitrary, and frequently brutal. From the moment they gained control of Kashmir, the Indian policy was to avoid, if not punish, all talk of a plebiscite. By installing Sheikh Abdullah, Nehru believed that he could convince the world that Kashmiri public opinion really favored union with India… India was also not above using underhanded, often unconstitutional, tricks in order to maintain control over Kashmir… [M]ost of the changes of government in Jammu and Kashmir were engineered by India when it felt threatened in Kashmir. Planned party splits, such as the one which brought G. M. Shah to power in 1984, were a favored weapon of the Indian government, though it was not averse to the simple device of dismissing the legislature and imposing direct rule, as in 1986 and 1990. Such moves, even though the common Kashmiri may not understand what happened, tend to erode faith in government, regardless of who runs it. Because it was India that always seemed to come out in control, Kashmiris assumed that the changes were planned by New Delhi…

The final issue in the Indian occupation of Kashmir is the one that shows the true leap from control to occupation. Regardless of the argument one could make about the situation between 1947 and 1989, there is no other description possible for the status of Kashmir since 1990 than occupied. The behavior of Indian soldiers and paramilitary troops in Kashmir has been systematically brutal.[43]

Even longtime Labour MP George Galloway has described the resistance movement as a “liberation struggle in the Indian-occupied territory of Kashmir.”[44]

In the same way that Israeli representative’s ongoing pronouncements of their commitment to peace are in practice largely irrelevant in relation to reality, the Indian government’s pronouncements in regard to the occupation of Kashmir are similarly irrelevant. In both cases, this is clear on inspection of the record of behaviour of the occupying powers. Citing independent reports by the international press and human rights groups (including the BBC World Service, Voice of America, Associated Press, Reuters, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Asia Watch, etc.) the Lord Avebury-endorsed Kashmir Council for Human Rights outlines the Indian government’s violations:

(1) Repression of right of free speech and freedom of press.

(2) Repression against holding peaceful demonstrations.

(3) Ill treatment, torture and deaths in custody.

(4) Denial of civil liberties.

(5) Denial of right to a fair trial.

(6) Persecution, humiliation and denial of a right to secure life.

(7) Disappearances of people taken into custody.

( Violations of the privacy of homes.

(9) Opprobrious treatment of elderly.

(10) Ill treatment of children.

(11) Physical and sexual assault on women used as a ‘weapon of combat’.

(12) Excessive force used by the members of the Indian security forces.

For the Indian government to stress its commitment to peace while systematically perpetrating the above gross abuses on a scale that far outweighs anything perpetrated by Kashmiri rebel groups, amounts to the most appalling cynicism. This scale of cynicism is familiar to those who have analysed the Israeli occupation of Palestine impartially.

UN resolutions on both Palestine and Kashmir effectively endorse the establishment of an independent state for the indigenous people. In the former case, this is explicitly indicated by the relevant resolutions, whereas in the latter it is implicitly – though directly and logically – indicated.

As already mentioned, numerous UN resolutions[45] directly endorse the right of the Kashmiri people to self-determination – to choose their future in terms of establishing either an independent state, or joining India or Pakistan. UN resolutions similarly endorse the right of Palestinians to self-determination in the form of an independent state – there is no need to hold a plebiscite on this matter because the international community is already well aware that the Palestinians are calling for self-determination in the particular form of an independent state. The similarity here is in the fact that the UN in both cases legislates for the self-determination of the indigenous population, a right that is deliberately violated by an occupying force.

The outcome of a possible plebiscite is, in fact, predicted to be against union with India, and in favour of either independence or accession to Pakistan. It is well known that the majority of Kashmiris are against accession to India. According to a poll conducted by MODE, India’s foremost public opinion organization, 77 per cent opted for “No solution within Indian Constitution”.[46] This echoes the proceedings of the Kashmir People’s Convention held in 1970: “In the Kashmir People’s convention held in the summer of 1970, but for a few feeble voices in our [India’s] favour, most of the delegates favoured either accession to Pakistan or creation of an independent Kashmir.”[47] Similarly, U.S. journalist Eric Margolis, who specializes in foreign affairs particularly in the Middle East, observes that: “India has been unable to extinguish the revolt by the Muslim majority, which demands either union with Pakistan, or independence”. He therefore further observes that “implementation of the plebiscite that the UN originally mandated in 1949 [would result in] a vote that would inevitably end Indian rule.” Accordingly, “India is just as determined to avoid ever holding a vote, or allowing any outside intervention in Kashmir… The issue of Indian-ruled Kashmir deserves world attention. Its long-oppressed Muslim majority has been misruled and brutalized by India, and denied the right to vote on its future in direct violation of a series of UN resolutions.”[48]

It is therefore important to also note the findings of the Indian NGO, the Delhi-based All India Peoples Resistance Forum (AIPRF). An all-India fact-finding team led by AIPRF consisting of twelve members toured the Kashmir valley between 14th September and 18th September 1999. AIPRF decided to send this team to Kashmir valley in the context of the nuclearisation of both India and Pakistan: “The fact-finding team led by AIPRF toured Pulwama, Budgam, Anantnag (Islamabad), Kupwara, Baramulla and Srinagar districts from 14/09/1999 to 18/09/1999. We have interviewed a cross section of people, besides government officials, military personnel and political personalities focussing our attention mainly on the common Kashmiri people. We have listened to heart-rending accounts of the reign of terror unleashed by the Indian security forces and also by pro-government militants, locally called “renegades”. Such accounts speak of custodial killings, crackdowns, indiscriminate firings, rapes, torture, etc. It gave us a semblance of an undeclared military rule.” The AIPRF fact-finding mission concluded that “The Kashmiri peoples aspiration for ‘rayshumari’ (referendum) / hakkhudiradiyat (self-determination) was heard wherever we went. The people of Kashmir do not want to be ‘aliens in their own land’ (“apne hi mulk mein paraye”) any more. Overwhelming majority of them wanted ‘azadi’ [freedom] both from India and Pakistan. They expressed the desire for a united Kashmir including India and Pak-occupied Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh.”[49]

Quote :

“The situation in Kashmir is a war of national liberation in exercise of the right to self-determination.” She goes on to record the history of the dispute and its ongoing ramifications:

Quote :

Karen Parker, a specialist in human rights and humanitarian law. Karen Parker reports regularly at the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva and its Subcommission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. Her legal arguments are frequently cited by UN officials and included in the final drafts of resolutions. According to many observers, Karen can be counted among the most skilled humanitarian advocates on the international scene today. Her recommendations have led to the adoption of key resolutions by the United Nations, the appointment of special rapporteurs, and the extension of human rights law into new areas such as the environment and disability. Her “six-prong test” for determining whether or not economic sanctions violate human rights and humanitarian law was adopted by the UN Special Rapporteur on Sanctions in his report to the Commission on Human Rights in August, 2000. She is the chief U.N. delegate of International Educational Development - Humanitarian Law

See how the international experts see our problem guys.

Quote :

As of January 1997, troops are said to number more than 600,000 (estimates vary from 600,000 to 800,000). Fact-finding missions to Indian-controlled Kashmir verify a widespread pattern of human rights and humanitarian law violations. Captured Kashmiri fighters are killed without trial and civilians are tortured and raped

My Kashmiri brothers, what are we explaining to these blind Indians.

Quote :

As thus noted by Michael Kolodner:

What makes the Indian control of Kashmir a military occupation, and unjustifiable even in comparison with other international absurdities, are India’s actions over the last half-century. In their attempt to maintain control over Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian government has been anti-democratic, arbitrary, and frequently brutal.

These are neutral voices on J&K and not Kashmiris with a warped mind (as suggested by many Indians).

Quote :

Indian NGO, the Delhi-based All India Peoples Resistance Forum (AIPRF). An all-India fact-finding team led by AIPRF consisting of twelve members toured the Kashmir valley between 14th September and 18th September 1999. AIPRF decided to send this team to Kashmir valley in the context of the nuclearisation of both India and Pakistan: “The fact-finding team led by AIPRF toured Pulwama, Budgam, Anantnag (Islamabad), Kupwara, Baramulla and Srinagar districts from 14/09/1999 to 18/09/1999. We have interviewed a cross section of people, besides government officials, military personnel and political personalities focussing our attention mainly on the common Kashmiri people. We have listened to heart-rending accounts of the reign of terror unleashed by the Indian security forces and also by pro-government militants, locally called “renegades”. Such accounts speak of custodial killings, crackdowns, indiscriminate firings, rapes, torture, etc. It gave us a semblance of an undeclared military rule.” The AIPRF fact-finding mission concluded that “The Kashmiri peoples aspiration for ‘rayshumari’ (referendum) / hakkhudiradiyat (self-determination) was heard wherever we went. The people of Kashmir do not want to be ‘aliens in their own land’ (“apne hi mulk mein paraye”) any more.

This is an Indian NGO who instead of all the talkers here came into J&K practically and then reported the above.

Quote :

U.S. journalist Eric Margolis, who specializes in foreign affairs particularly in the Middle East, observes that: “India has been unable to extinguish the revolt by the Muslim majority, which demands either union with Pakistan, or independence”. He therefore further observes that “implementation of the plebiscite that the UN originally mandated in 1949 [would result in] a vote that would inevitably end Indian rule.” Accordingly, “India is just as determined to avoid ever holding a vote, or allowing any outside intervention in Kashmir… The issue of Indian-ruled Kashmir deserves world attention. Its long-oppressed Muslim majority has been misruled and brutalized by India, and denied the right to vote on its future in direct violation of a series of UN resolutions.”

For those who are still blind to Indian atrocities in J&K, We Kashmiris hold no grudges against them but they have to understand that right to self determination is our birth right.

@Chinaar
Great work Brother. For this to happen we have to have proof in form of documentation, photographs and even videos. It has to be a combination of lawyers, Journos, Human rights activitist and Doctors. Do we have a forum for this. If not how to esablish it.

@Chinaar:

Thankyou for posting this. I have always felt that we should take our claim to the international court of justice. When I spoke with some other learned Kashmiris in regard to this, they suggested that the only hurdle is that only representative governments of a particular region can approach the ICJ to resolve a dispute with another government. In our case, the government of Kashmir could approach the ICJ to file a grievance against the Indian occupation.

I feel that we could have a multi-faceted approach to tackle this:

-The Hurriyat forms a parallel government overseas (maybe in a friendly western country and then approach the ICJ)
-We compell the government in AJK to approach the ICJ.
-We lobby western governments to allow our case be heard in the International court of justice as a special case.

Approaching the International court of justice is definitely one of the best options in our arsenal. (Among those pleading our case, we will definitely have one of the best "Indian" attorneys Mr A.G Noorani represent our case. He is definitely the small number of Indians with a conscience to call a forced occupation just that)

@Jehangir/Admin

Thank you guys but we can go a step ahead and have this post published in the local dailies and requesting the Hurriyat and AJK government to jointly approach the International criminal court at the Hague etc. We have to start somewhere and I am certain that the hundreds of cases pending before the State human rights organisation and cases registered by Amnesty International, HRW etc will be in our favour.

So guys, don't give up.....just keep working. The onus is on all of us Kashmiris to take our just struggle forward.

Quote :

Civilian killings in firings
The insurgency that began in 1989 in the Valley involved hundreds of thousands of Kashmiris marching on the streets of Srinagar between January and May 1990. Under Jagmohan’’s regime, India’’s response to the protests was brutal with indiscriminate firings at unarmed protesters; The atrocities committed by Indian forces has been acknowledged by senior Indian officials including the Prime Ministers Rajiv Gandhi, Chandrashekhar and P.V. Narasimha Rao, during their tenure and the State Governor Girish Saxena.
(Source: Balraj Puri, Kashmir: Towards Insurgency, New Delhi 1993, pp.72-3.)
• On 20 January 1990, an estimated 100 people were killed when a large group of unarmed protesters were fired upon by the Indian troops at the Gawakadal bridge.
• On March 1 1990, an estimated one million took to the streets and more than forty people were killed in police firing.
• In May 1990, an estimated 200,000 Kashmiris took to the streets in a funeral procession of the martyred leader Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq; over 100 were killed in police firing.
• In January 1993, 40 people were killed in Sopore by security forces who burnt down a section of the town after two of their men were killed.

• In March 2000, nine civilians were killed in police firing in a large demonstration at Brakpora protesting killing of civilians at Panchalthan.
• In August 2000, 35 civilians were killed including 23 Amarnath pilgrims in Pahalgam; it has come to light that most of the people were killed in fact by the panic-stricken CRPF jawans who continued firing for another 20 minutes after the two suspected militants were killed; a commission under Lt.Gen. Mukherjee found 17 police officers responsible.
o Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Report On human rights violations in Kashmir.
• Indian forces also have severely beaten 17 journalists in May 2001.
o Human Rights Watch, India/Pakistan Summit: Call to Address Human Rights in Kashmir , 2001.
• In January 2002, Indian troops killed a civilian and wounded another in a firing at a demonstration at Sodal, protesting civilian beatings in search operations.
• Indian Military Men who have over the past 20 years plundered our women, raped, pillaged and killed countless innocents. Check the different sets of judicial cases against the many Indian army officials pending before the State Human Rights Commission of J&K (WHICH IS NOTHING BUT A LAME DUCK).
• What about the thousands of graves discovered recently in Kashmir.
• In October 1996, a Union Home Ministry report for 1995-96 stated that 272 J&K security personnel including 153 BSF, 80 CRPF, and 39 army personnel, had been “sacked, jailed or disciplined” for abuses committed in the past five years; a number hardly proportional to the number of violators, by most accounts.
Torture and Custodial Killings
Civilians suspected of having information about militants, many of them innocent, are routinely detained, tortured and killed in custody, besides militants. Methods of torture include severe beatings, electric shock, crushing the leg muscles with a wooden roller, and burning with heated objects.
In 1995, Amnesty International documented 706 cases of custodial killings in the period 1990-1994, nearly all after gruesome torture; In its response to Amnesty, the Government of India (GOI) responded to 519 out of 706 cases in an evasive manner, dismissing half of them as “encounter killings” without supporting evidence despite eye-witness reports to the contrary; The government indicated that there was prima facie evidence of human rights violations in 85 other cases which were said to be under investigation, however no one has been brought to justice till date.
• Amnesty International, Torture and Deaths in Custody in Jammu and Kashmir, 1995.
• Amnesty International, Analysis of the Government of India’’s response to Amnesty International’’s report on torture and deaths in custody in Jammu and Kashmir , 1995.
On 26 April 1993, The Kashmir Times run by Ved Bhasin carried a report of police records listing 132 persons to have been killed in custody in the preceding 33 days alone. The Kashmir Monitor, a human rights group, has reported around 220 custodial deaths for the period June”94-April”95 which represent the bare minimum. Estimate of the number of custodial killings since 1990 by human rights organizations runs in several thousands, many of them are civilians.
• Pankaj Mishra, Death in Kashmir
• Human Rights Watch,India’’s Secret Army In Kashmir
“Disappearances”
In August 2000, Amnesty International reported that the fates of up to 1,000 persons reported missing in Jammu and Kashmir since 1990 remain unexplained by authorities. Few of the hundreds of habeas corpus petitions filed by families of the “disappeared” before the judiciary in Jammu and Kashmir have been brought to a resolution. The Kashmir Monitor has also documented around 300 cases of disappearance during 1989-95.
• Amnesty International, India (Jammu and Kashmir): Day of the “Disappeared”, 2000.
Rapes
Hundreds of women have been raped with impunity and most of them go unreported given the social stigma and fear of retribution by the State; The GOI has been quick to deny and cover-up most of those cases which do get reported; The reported gang-rape of nine women at Shopian in October 1992 by an army unit was dismissed off-handedly after investigation by army and police, the very units charged with the crime, despite solid medical evidence to the contrary; no independent investigation by an impartial agency was carried out. The reported mass rape of over 20 women at Konan Poshpura in February 1991 was also handled in a similar evasive manner; the complaint was not investigated in a timely manner by an impartial agency and the medical evidence was dismissed without good cause; one of the victims who was nine months pregnant during the incident delivered a baby with a fractured left arm; Governor Girish Saxena who denied the incident admitted to mass rapes in the past by the Indian forces however. Rapes continue to be reported, an example from this year being the April 17 gang-rape of a 17-year old girl in Pahalgam.
• Amnesty International, Torture and Deaths in Custody in Jammu and Kashmir, 1995.
• Asia Watch and Physicians for Human Rights, The Human Rights Crisis in Kashmir: A Pattern of Impunity, 1993, pp.98-107.
• Tavleen Singh, Kashmir: A Tragedy of Errors, New Delhi 1995, p.177
• BBC News, Kashmir troops held after rape, april 19, 2002.
Pro-India Renegade Militants
The phenomenon of renegade militants has been extensively documented by Human Rights Watch. Renegades are former militants who have surrendered and changed sides to the Indian forces. Since the 1989 insurgency in Kashmir, renegades have been used for extrajudicial executions of militants (besides human right activists, journalists and other civilians) and later conveniently dismissed as “intergroup rivalries”. Many of these groups have been responsible for grave human rights abuses, including summary executions, torture, and illegal detention as well as election-related intimidation of voters. They are never arrested or prosecuted and go scot-free.
• Human Rights Watch,India’’s Secret Army In Kashmir
In 1997, the Director General of Police Gurbachan Jagat acknowledged that the continued services of the renegades had become counter-productive in view of their excesses; an estimated 5000 renegades were reportedly ”rehabilitated” as Special Police Officers (SPO) in the State police and many others were absorbed in the security forces. The present number of renegade militants continues to be significant and the estimates vary; In 1999, Gurbachan Jagat acknowledged that there were 1,200 renegades in the payroll of New Delhi; According to a renegade representative Javed Shah, the number of renegades exceeded 2,000; Renegades remain a dreaded group and can be used by the Indians again to suppress the public.
• Amnesty International, Disappearances in Jammu and Kashmir, 1999.
• Indian Express, J&K’’s friendly ultras say pay more, or else…,4 May, 1999.
The Chattisinghpora cover-up
In March 2000, around the time of US President Clinton’’s visit to India, unidentified gunmen gunned down 35 Sikhs at Chittisinghpora; India blamed foreign militants; Kashmiris blamed renegade militants employed by Indian security forces; A few days after the massacre, security forces killed five persons in an “encounter” at Panchalthan village and claimed they are “foreign militants” responsible for the Sikh massacre. Later, in July 2002, DNA testing of the corpses proved that the five persons killed were civilians.
The relatives of the five murdered villagers held a series of demonstrations for public exhuming of the bodies; A crowd of five thousand unarmed civilians at Brakpora was fired upon by the police; Nine more men died; When the bodies were finally exhumed, they were discovered to have been burnt and defaced, but curiously dressed in brand new army fatigues. They were identified by the relatives as the local villagers who went missing. Initial attempts in DNA testing of the exhumed bodies were compromised by fudging of the DNA samples in a cover-up attempt by the authorities; Later results indicated that the five persons killed by the Indian forces were indeed civilians and that Indian forces engaged in a deliberate subterfuge to portray them as “foreign” militants responsible for the Sikh massacre.
The Pandian Commission investigated the firing at Brakpora and pronounced that three police officers be tried for murder, however no action has been taken against them till date; No judicial inquiry into the Sikh massacre itself has been conducted till date despite repeated announcements. While some argue that the Chattisinghpora massacre may very well have been engineered by the Indian forces for political gains during Clinton’’s visit, the least that can be said is that confirmed, unpunished atrocities of the security forces most certainly do not inspire confidence in the people, and fuel resentment instead.
The army-renegade nexus
• Jalil Andrabi, the human right activist was abducted by the paramilitary and renegades in March 1996 in the presence of eye-witnesses and tortured to death in custody. Despite the GOI’’s initial denials of the army’’s involvement, the Special Investigation Team identified an army Major in April 1997 as the person responsible for the death; however the accused major was released with no punishment.
• H.N. Wanchoo, the noted human rights activist had documented and filed writ petitions for hundreds of custodial deaths in 1992; Being a Pandit, his petitions were an embarrassment to the Central and State governments. He was assassinated by unidentified gunmen in December 1992; Although the government claimed that the persons responsible belonged to the militant outfit Jamiat-ul Mujahidin, human rights activists who investigated the case have alleged that the militants of that group were released from jail on condition that they kill Wanchoo. Following his death, none of the custodial death cases were heard in the court and lawyers attempting to get the cases listed have reportedly found that many of the files of these cases were now missing from the High Court premises.
• Dr. Farooq Ahmad Ashai, chief of orthopaedics and a human rights activist who had spoken against the GOI was killed by gunshots from a CRPF bunker while travelling in a car clearly marked with a red cross. The government stated that he had been killed in ”crossfire”, despite evidence to the contrary. Dr. Abdul Ahad Guru, a surgeon who had treated torture victims was killed by unidentified gunmen. A government source alleged to Human Rights Watch that Zulkar Nan, a militant, had been released specifically to carry out the murder. Shortly afterwards, Indian security forces shot and killed Zulkar Nan. [14]
• Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq and Abdul Ghani Lone, two Kashmiri activists were killed by unidentified gunmen on 21 May 1990 and 2002 respectively. In both cases, the governments blamed militants while some Kashmiris blamed Indian sponsored renegades.
• Human Rights Watch, Behind the Kashmir Conflict, 1999.
• Human Rights Watch, Violations By Indian Government Forces: State-sponsored “renegade” Militias, 1996.
Accountability
The National Human Rights Commission’’s (NHRC) presence has not been effective in improving the human rights record; For instance, the NHRC lacks the jurisdiction to investigate complaints of violations by the army and paramilitary forces. New Delhi continues to deny permission for various human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch, UN Special Rapporteur of Torture and others, to visit Jammu and Kashmir and investigate the violations.
Chief Secretary Ashok Jaitley acknowledged that while disciplinary action was taken against security personnel involved in large massacres in the mid-1990s, no prosecutions take place as no witness will dare step forward. What action is taken is not made public. In the past, the GOI has made public a number of prosecutions of members of security forces for rape. However, even these amount to no more than a handful; many other incidents of rape have never been prosecuted. In its 1999 report, Human Rights Watch stated that it was not aware of a single prosecution in a case of the torture or summary execution of a detainee in the ten years since the conflict began.
The fact that the officer indicted in the 1996 murder of a human rights lawyer Jalil Andrabi, has not yet been arrested, contrasts sharply with the GOI’’s claim that it has ensured greater accountability from its forces in Kashmir.
• Human Rights Watch, The Ongoing Problem of Impunity , 1999.
• Amnesty International, Torture and Deaths in Custody in Jammu and Kashmir, 1995.
• Amnesty International, Impunity must end in Jammu and Kashmir, 2001.
Full force of the law
The Armed Forces Special Powers Act of 1958 and the Disturbed Areas Act of 1976 give police extraordinary powers of search and arrest without warrants and detention. The Special Powers Act provides that unless approval is obtained from the Central Government, no “prosecution, suit, or other legal proceeding shall be instituted…against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers of the act.” To human rights groups, it is such provisions that allow security forces to operate with virtual impunity.
According to one NGO, there were 1,300 writs of habeas corpus pending in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in 1999 in such detention cases. The government is also known to abuse such powers, an example being the case of Yasin Malik, chairman of the JKLF, a separatist group. He was arrested under POTA on 23 March on charges of accepting illegal money, a charge which he refuted as a frame-up. Intriguingly the prosecution failed to present the mandatory challan within ninety days of his detention under POTA despite repeated directions by the court and the judge ordered his release on bail; subsequently he was rearrested under the Public Safety Act(PSA). The events clearly show that the POTA case was indeed a frame-up.
A charge which the GOI did not deny in a response to Amnesty was that it had issued secret orders to the Police to disregard complaints of human rights violations against the security forces in FIRs. This leads to the conclusion that the number of registered complaints are probably fewer than the number of excesses actually committed.
• Amnesty International, Analysis of the Government of India’’s response to Amnesty International’’s report on torture and deaths in custody in Jammu and Kashmir , 1995.

Guys, if just a few of us working together can gather so much information, imagine what a few million Kashmiris can do.

Quote :

India’’s Secret Army In Kashmir- the renegades

If these renegades are prosecuted and questioned at the Hague, all Indian counter claims would be white washed as we all know what these renegades have done to Kashmir. Its a classic question of who will bell the cat....I guess somehow through trial n error, we will find a way.

Yes, we can but only if we lift ourselves up like the people of Bomai.

We need more organized interaction between all Kashmiri freedom groups around the world. More coordination.

Guys, keep working and stay pro-active.