By Hassan Zainagiree
Srinagar, June 11: It's always guilty that must be punished, no matter who he is, what
institution he belongs to. What matters is the nature of crime and the
spirit of justice which must be the only standard to judge the merit of
the case, comments -Aggressors like Halakoo and Changaiz did what
history recorded them for. Genocides, macabre death dances,
imperialistic arrogance and killing sprees. They hungered for blood and
blood they had in full.
They played hosts for the owls to celebrate doomsday. They loved and
enjoyed the “music” of innocent hapless yelling in pain, frying in
agony. Unlike present day “civilized democrats”, champions of human
rights and “secularists”, these “savage tormentors” however, did not
wear gloves to hide their murdering hands, nor put on masks to conceal
their identity. They raised the minarets of skulls in broad day light.
They created tsunami of death and destruction quite openly. To let no
one harbor any misunderstanding or misconception about their intentions.
In the guise of saviors they didn't masquerade as brutal killers.
Summary executions they would take at the wink of an eye. But would be
ashamed of carrying out enforced disappearances, take encounters and
custodial killings. Merciless tyrants they undoubtedly were. But
duplicitous and cunning they certainly were not.
What the “civilized” world is doing today under various garbs and
after taking “solemn pledges” of “respecting human dignity” and showing
commitment to International Laws and numerous Geneva Conventions, makes
it absolutely clear that medieval period ruthless warriors and
despotic monarchs had at least one moral edge over present day
“democratic” rulers. In their not being guilty conscience they had not
to hide their criminal profile under various “legal” nuances, nor fudge
the records and resort to unmarked graves.
If by some miracle the Halakus and Changaizes were to arise from
their graves, they would file in defamation suits against their
“siblings” in death and destruction for unjustifiably maligning and
accusing them for what they “excelled” in perfection themselves.
In a modern state if institutions of justice are deprived of serving
the basic purpose of providing justice to the victim and their
“constitutional powers” of prosecuting proceedings against perpetrators
of heinous crimes, the state is, of its own, blurring the distinction
between detestable regime it denounces and the democratic state it takes
pride of giving it to its people. In this backdrop, invoking Armed
Forces Special Power Act to halt administration of justice has all but
exposed Indian state in its tall claims that every one is accountable
before the law of land. On April 24 was stayed the trial of involving
murdering civilians in fake gunfights by police and army. The ruling
came after the counsel for union of India pleaded that army personnel
named in case could not be prosecuted as the sanction has not been given
by the government of India which is an essential requirement under the
section 7 of the AFSPA. Earlier Supreme Court of India stayed
proceedings in an identical case (Pathribal case) in which five
civilians were murdered and then passed off as foreign militants
responsible for massacre of 35 Sikhs in Chittisingpora. Forensic tests
revealed they were civilians. It is to be noted that the chief judicial
magistrate in Srinagar has asked the army to either stand trial in a
criminal court or in an army court. But the army refused to exercise the
option and stated it enjoys impunity under AFSPA.
The fake encounter came to force last year. Eleven persons, including
five army personnel, are accused of murdering of innocent people for
promotion and “gallantry” award. The guilty police officers have already
been arrested and are facing the trial. Justice demanded both troops
and police personnel involved in the same crime and who are accomplice
of each other should be punished and no discrimination shown. How can a
killer in olive green be exonerated while the one in khaki be
prosecuted? This is close to apartheid and smacks of neo-colonial
approach. A sweeping generalization Delhi insists observers must avoid
from making. “Individual aberrations”, it argues in defense.
Prosecuting erring soldiers doesn't mean prosecuting or maligning
army as an institution. Only a “miniscule” from 'individual aberration',
it means, have to account for their grave crimes they perpetrated
against unarmed civilians. It is only when state shields such “action
addicts”, under one pretext or other, that, infact, tars black the
entire face of Indian army and drills holes in its claim that it is a
“disciplinary” force. This attitude of authorities emboldens men in
uniform to indulge in more excesses and atrocities. Even those immune to
such “heroic” adventures loose the veneer of tolerance and get going. A
message flows down the rank and file: We are above the law. State is
behind us for every thing we will do. Thus it is state that gives them a
license to kill and main, rape and destroy. On one hand Delhi
repeatedly talks of “zero-tolerance” on human rights, on the other, it
invokes the draconian law to ensure infringement.
The AFSPA requires pre-sanction of Delhi for prosecuting guilty
soldiers, which usually is not given as Delhi's rigidness shows. More
than 300 cases of gross human rights abuses against Indian forces like
army and para-military troops could not be tried because Indian Home
Ministry has not granted sanction. This is how authorities in Delhi are
bent on frustrating administration of justice.
AFSPA and democracy are irreconcilable and can't be stuffed in one
scabbard. Amnesty International too states that the black law encourages
and abets abuse of human rights by men in uniform. Why authorities in
Delhi allow a handful of soldiers to tarnish the image of the
organization and the country they belong to, one fails to understand.For
its own sake it is time Delhi repeal the law that has dented its
credibility as a democratic state.
(The edited version of the article written by Kashmiri writer Hassan Zainagiree)
