HUMAN RIGHTS
Binayak Released
but Many Questions Remain Unanswered
:- KG Kannabiran
but Many Questions Remain Unanswered
:- KG Kannabiran
Binayak Sen has been released at last. But was there any reason at all for his arrest? There was a debate in the electronic media on his release. The debate was not about Binayak Sen, his background and about the total absence of reason for his arrest and prosecution. The media person who generally guides the debate did not ask questions about his arrest and prosecution. He veered the debate around to Maoists and their acts of violence and the condemnation of the Maoists and their politics. Thus the media person very successfully moved away from the debate about Binayak Sen and his arrest. The debate throughout was a campaign against the Maoists. Gautam Navlakha fell into this trap and was arguing about the tribes, their land and its expropriation, none of which is of interest to Arnold, the media person.
The result of the confused debate was that Binayak was not projected as a medical person who was practicing in these areas after he joined Shankar Guha Niyogi and that he played a pivotal role in setting up a workers’ hospital in Dilli Rajara. It did not strike Gautam to mention about Binayak being the last of the bare-feet doctors who was treating the tribals in the area. The unspoken assumption left is that Binayak Sen is linked to the Maoists. The grant of bail without any arguments and on his personal bond is not a favour. The extensive appeals by the medical doctors in the country and the resolution in the British Parliament facilitated his release. No organizational effort, nor any lawyer's, semantic effort.
In fact Dr. Ramanadham, a Medical Doctor and a Vice President of Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC) became a naxalite suspect for taking up the cause of human rights violations when an Inspector, Yadgiri Reddy, was shot by Naxalites at the Kazipet Railway Station on the 2nd of September. On the next day, as the police inspector’s dead body was vending its way to the funeral along the main road wherefrom the Doctor’s clinic was a few yards away from the procession, some people entered the clinic and shot Doctor Ramanandhan dead. The SP of police was at the head of the procession. A general Secretary of the District Bar of Warangal was shot in his house while he was reading the morning paper. His wife was made to clean the blood-stained floor; Lakshma Reddi was dragged out of his house and shot; Purushotham, an advocate and Azam Ali, a teacher, were slaughtered in broad day light. All of them belonged to the APCLC and all of them were human rights activists. All these deaths were uninvestigated, and if investigated at all, then very perfunctorily. While we of the Human Rights organization are grateful for small mercies shown, we would like to know what is the offence committed by Binayak. The legal and Constitutional background must be borne in mind. In 1948 on the 10th December the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed. After some time the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were brought into force. India is a signatory to these after entering their Reservations. On the 26th Jan 1950 the Constitutionof India came into force, recognizing our liberties, providing for judicial enforceability of chapter III of the Constitution which deals with the Fundamental Rights. The most important liberty Article 21 is about forfeiture of life or liberty of the person without procedure established by law. The word person is inclusive of the citizen. The question then is: Is forfeiture of liberty of Binayak authorised by law?
Binayak Sen is a human right activist and the General Secretary of the state unit of People’s Union for Civil Liberties, an All India Organization founded by Sri Jaya Prakash Narayan. He is the General Secretary of a human rights organization and as a doctor he is a human rights activist as health is a fundamental right and a human right as well. He has been working as such in Chattisgarh, predominantly a tribal area. Apart from forest predators, poachers and all manner of parasites are present in the tribal, area and to prevent these from stealing or making away with forest wealth police and forest bureaucracies are present and they also turn parasites dependent on forest wealth. A human Rights Activist has to deal with these if he is serious about his work. He believes that by protecting human rights he will protect democracy. Without understanding the nature of the job he has undertaken, like many of us, the police implicated him in the offences alleged to have been committed by the Maoist movement that is present in these areas.
With the enactment of The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, Human Rights have been given a statutory basis and therefore human rights activities are legitimate and cannot be considered irrelevant in matters of forfeiture of life or liberty. Whenever and wherever human rights violation takes place, the human rights activist is entitled to intervene and protest.
Normally when making arrest of a suspect and detaining him in custody he is subjected to interrogation for recording confessions for recovery of articles connected with the crime and also compelled to confess to the crime he is suspected of, and if it is an associational crime like conspiracy, once the prosecution establishes an agreement between two or more persons, his statement implicating others becomes admissible against them. It is during this period that large human rights violations take place. With reference to Personal Liberty, human rights violations generally take place during investigation, that is to say, the time when a suspect is taken into custody and the filing of charge sheet is the period human rights violations are most likely to take place. And Binayak was, as we would have, protesting and meeting police officials to see that human rights violations do not take place. A Human Rights activist is found busy while investigation is on, and to get rid of this obstacle that impedes impunity by the police, the human rights activist is implicated and even killed. The fear of exposure of impunity that leads the police to shoot down activists, as in Andhra, or cause disappearance as in the case of Jaswant Singh Karla. This trend has to be stopped and the human rights field has to be made a ‘no risk zone’! We must make the justice system accept and recognize the legitimate field of human rights activity. We must argue for a binding law that interference by human rights activist is legitimate and valid and that is the only way of reducing impunity in governance. There is a necessity for review of the precedents from the colonial times holding that irregularities in pre-trial investigation will not vitiate the trial. These precedents deprive the human rights activists of a proper and a legitimate defense. They have to be argued and agitated against.
The result of the confused debate was that Binayak was not projected as a medical person who was practicing in these areas after he joined Shankar Guha Niyogi and that he played a pivotal role in setting up a workers’ hospital in Dilli Rajara. It did not strike Gautam to mention about Binayak being the last of the bare-feet doctors who was treating the tribals in the area. The unspoken assumption left is that Binayak Sen is linked to the Maoists. The grant of bail without any arguments and on his personal bond is not a favour. The extensive appeals by the medical doctors in the country and the resolution in the British Parliament facilitated his release. No organizational effort, nor any lawyer's, semantic effort.
In fact Dr. Ramanadham, a Medical Doctor and a Vice President of Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC) became a naxalite suspect for taking up the cause of human rights violations when an Inspector, Yadgiri Reddy, was shot by Naxalites at the Kazipet Railway Station on the 2nd of September. On the next day, as the police inspector’s dead body was vending its way to the funeral along the main road wherefrom the Doctor’s clinic was a few yards away from the procession, some people entered the clinic and shot Doctor Ramanandhan dead. The SP of police was at the head of the procession. A general Secretary of the District Bar of Warangal was shot in his house while he was reading the morning paper. His wife was made to clean the blood-stained floor; Lakshma Reddi was dragged out of his house and shot; Purushotham, an advocate and Azam Ali, a teacher, were slaughtered in broad day light. All of them belonged to the APCLC and all of them were human rights activists. All these deaths were uninvestigated, and if investigated at all, then very perfunctorily. While we of the Human Rights organization are grateful for small mercies shown, we would like to know what is the offence committed by Binayak. The legal and Constitutional background must be borne in mind. In 1948 on the 10th December the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed. After some time the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were brought into force. India is a signatory to these after entering their Reservations. On the 26th Jan 1950 the Constitutionof India came into force, recognizing our liberties, providing for judicial enforceability of chapter III of the Constitution which deals with the Fundamental Rights. The most important liberty Article 21 is about forfeiture of life or liberty of the person without procedure established by law. The word person is inclusive of the citizen. The question then is: Is forfeiture of liberty of Binayak authorised by law?
Binayak Sen is a human right activist and the General Secretary of the state unit of People’s Union for Civil Liberties, an All India Organization founded by Sri Jaya Prakash Narayan. He is the General Secretary of a human rights organization and as a doctor he is a human rights activist as health is a fundamental right and a human right as well. He has been working as such in Chattisgarh, predominantly a tribal area. Apart from forest predators, poachers and all manner of parasites are present in the tribal, area and to prevent these from stealing or making away with forest wealth police and forest bureaucracies are present and they also turn parasites dependent on forest wealth. A human Rights Activist has to deal with these if he is serious about his work. He believes that by protecting human rights he will protect democracy. Without understanding the nature of the job he has undertaken, like many of us, the police implicated him in the offences alleged to have been committed by the Maoist movement that is present in these areas.
With the enactment of The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, Human Rights have been given a statutory basis and therefore human rights activities are legitimate and cannot be considered irrelevant in matters of forfeiture of life or liberty. Whenever and wherever human rights violation takes place, the human rights activist is entitled to intervene and protest.
Normally when making arrest of a suspect and detaining him in custody he is subjected to interrogation for recording confessions for recovery of articles connected with the crime and also compelled to confess to the crime he is suspected of, and if it is an associational crime like conspiracy, once the prosecution establishes an agreement between two or more persons, his statement implicating others becomes admissible against them. It is during this period that large human rights violations take place. With reference to Personal Liberty, human rights violations generally take place during investigation, that is to say, the time when a suspect is taken into custody and the filing of charge sheet is the period human rights violations are most likely to take place. And Binayak was, as we would have, protesting and meeting police officials to see that human rights violations do not take place. A Human Rights activist is found busy while investigation is on, and to get rid of this obstacle that impedes impunity by the police, the human rights activist is implicated and even killed. The fear of exposure of impunity that leads the police to shoot down activists, as in Andhra, or cause disappearance as in the case of Jaswant Singh Karla. This trend has to be stopped and the human rights field has to be made a ‘no risk zone’! We must make the justice system accept and recognize the legitimate field of human rights activity. We must argue for a binding law that interference by human rights activist is legitimate and valid and that is the only way of reducing impunity in governance. There is a necessity for review of the precedents from the colonial times holding that irregularities in pre-trial investigation will not vitiate the trial. These precedents deprive the human rights activists of a proper and a legitimate defense. They have to be argued and agitated against.
Comments