A Roster of Crimes Against Chhattisgarh State and DGP Vishwaranjan
Cases of Dr. Binayak Sen and Mr. T.G.Ajay: Terrorizing Human Rights Defenders / Development Activists?
1. Why is the State Afraid of the Good Doctor?
Question: Why does the State NOT specify charges against Dr.Binayak Sen NOR produce any evidence regarding his actions and yet keep him in jail for 534 days?
The chargesheet against Dr. Sen under CSPSA intentionally uses “vague” terms such as “sedition,” “waging war against the state” and “abetting unlawful activities.” He is charged with helping an illegal organization as a member by participating in it OR as a non-member by funding OR receiving funds OR by “hatching a conspiracy.” Dates, time or places of these “activities” are often not specified. This allows police to endlessly drag the trial by producing long list of witnesses without specifying their relevance.
2. Dr. Sen, Can We Presume?
Question: On what basis has the police determined that Dr. Sen is a “doctor in name only”?
The chargesheet against Dr.Sen says that he “is certainly a doctor: but is a big zero in terms of actual practice of medicine.” Does a gold medal from CMC Vellore, the 2004 Paul Harrison Award, Global Health Council’s Jonathan Mann Award 2008, and founding Shaheed Hospital in Chhattisgarh not matter?
3. No Evidence? Doesn’ Matter, Plant Some
Question: Why did the police try to fabricate evidence against Dr. Sen?
Even though the seizure memo in Dr. Sen’s case lists 10 items obtained from his premises signed by the Investigating Officer (IO), Dr. Sen and witnesses, the sealed bag of evidence opened in court had 11 objects, the extra one bearing only the signatures of the IO and prosecution witness.
4. Now, who is a threat to who?
Question: Can you explain why there is a consistent attempt to harass Dr.Ilina Sen (Binayak Sen’s wife and co-activist) -neither an accused nor a witness- both in and outside the court room?
On July 2nd, 2008, during the trial, the public prosecutor tried to implicate Dr. Ilina Sen by asking leading questions to a witness asking him to “identify” Ilina in court. On another occasion, the same prosecutor publicly threatened to falsely implicate Ilina by boasting that “if the defence wished they could make the wife of the accused an accused in the present case at anytime.”
5.No Chargesheet, But Imprisoned; Released, But Not Free
Question: Why was Mr. T.G. Ajay, an independent film maker jailed for 93 days under CSPSA, and with no chargesheet produced by the police at the end? Why is Ajay’s case not yet withdrawn?
Question: Why were police personnel threatening the women and children of the slum where Ajay’s school, Drksakshi operates despite all odds on issues of malnutrition, illiteracy and livelihood?
6. Entrapment?
Question: Why was Ajay being pressurized to sign a letter falsely implicating Binayak Sen and the PUCL as a condition for his release?
Despite efforts to try and frame him, Ajay had to be released on statutory bail. The police could not find any evidence of his wrong-doing. Yet, as shockingly revealed by PUCL legal team, Ajay was also being forced by the police to sign a statement against PUCL, Binayak and Ilina Sen as a condition for his release.
Salwa Judum: Democracy Chhattisgarh-Style, State Impunity For State Violence Against Citizens?
1.When Report after Report Documents State Sponsored Violence…Can The Emperor Have Any Clothes?
Question: Will the DGP (as the senior most police officer in the State) be liable for murder? Since the State and its police dept. gives logistic and monetary support to Salwa Judum, shouldn’t they be considered accomplices?
In September 2008, a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, and Justices P Sathasivam and J M Panchal after perusing the National Human Rights Commission report on violence in Chhattisgarh said, “The allegation is that the state is arming private persons. You can deploy as many police personnel or armed forces to tackle the menace. But, if private persons, so armed by the state government, kill other persons, then the state is also liable to be prosecuted as abettor of the murder.” Chief Justice Balakrishnan added “It is very painful to read the report. It says there is arson and looting, people are armed and they [Salwa Judum] are committing serious offences. It says people who are subjected to serious problems are still afraid of coming out.”
Question: What kind of police force has more than 85% of its officers commit crimes that got them “discharged”?
In a recent interview in Pioneer, the DGP admitted that 3,250 Special Police Officers (SPOs, the official title for Salwa Judum employees) were “discharged on various grounds of indiscipline.” The DGP has also claimed (to HRW) that there are 3800 SPOs altogether (the SP Dantewada claimed 3500). If this is the admission of the top police officer, then is it difficult to see why SPOs murder, rape, & forcibly displace?
Question: Will the DGP now include the Supreme Court justices in his list of “Maoist sympathizers” who are demoralizing the Indian state?
The DGP is fond of calling anyone who condemns the Salwa Judum as “maoist sympathizer”. This list includes so far Shankar Guha Niyogi–labour leader founder of India’s largest mass organization, the Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha; sociologist Nandini Sundar, historian Ramachandra Guha, author Arundhati Roy, journalist Shubhranshu Choudhary, human rights groups such as PUCL, Gandhians such as Kanak Tiwari, Himanshu Kumar and Sandeep Pandey, the entire Planning Commission Experts Committee–in short he includes anyone who dares to dissent in his terrorized state.
2. How to Make a Terrorist? A State Primer
Question: Why does the Chhattisgarh police arm children under 18 years? Does the DGP know that “Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities” constitutes a war crime under the “Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998″?
“The police asked me also to become an SPO [special police officer] but I refused because I did not want to become an SPO and commit heinous crimes. I did not want to shoot and kill people. … They do not ask anyone how old they are. Even 14-year-olds can become SPOs if the police want them to become SPOs.”
– Poosam Kanya (pseudonym), former resident of Errabore camp, December 2007 (Human Rights Watch)
3.Deny First Information Reports (FIRs), Claim no Evidence= No Atrocities
Question: Why are FIRs not filed for cases when victims have requested that they be filed?
On 18th March 2008, three tribals in Matwada Salwa Judum camp in Bijapur district were brutally killed by the Salwa Judum/police. On August 11th, 2008, Salwa Judum/police killed 5 people at the Arlampalli village. The police refused to file any FIRs in both cases despite constant requests by Himanshu Kumar of the Vanvasi Chetna Ashram. On March 31, 2007 the Salwa Judum/police killed six or more aboriginals in Santoshpur/Ponjer, a fact that was testified later by the “team leader of SPOs” to a journalist.
4. Meritocracy in the Bureaucracy: Murder, Rape, Torture as Credentials
Question: Why has no action been taken against former SP Kalluri for his crimes?
S.R.P. Kalluri, (Former) SP,Balrampur has been implicated in Custodial rape of Ledha Bai and murder of her husband, Police beatings in Ambikapur, Lathicharge of Rozgar Adhikar Yatra (March for Right to Employment), custodial torture, fake encounters and Intimidation of Lawyers. Kalluri has been promoted and made DIG, Anti-naxal operations, in the capital city of Raipur.
5. Who is in charge in Chhattisgarh?
Question: Why does the Chhattisgarh government harass NGOs by speaking in two voices?
In August 2007, Chhattisgarh state tried to ban NGOs, including Medicine Sans Borders (MSF or Doctors without Borders). Why did a local DC (Dantewada) and SP (Bijapur) claim that NGO’s (and MSF) are assisting Maoists, whilst the State government in Raipur expressed full cooperation with MSF? Why did the media rush to declare MSF as banned, leading to harassment of MSF personnel by Salwa Judum?
- How can the DG claim that the Salwa Judum is a “peace movement”?
- Will the findings of multiple reports make the Chhattisgarh state stop supporting the Salwa Judum?
- Is this Roster not proof of the inability of the DGP as the highest ranking police officer in the state to perform his job? Why should he not be asked to resign?
Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act (CSPSA) is a new version of extraordinary laws such as POTA and TADA that bypass many routine forms of due process through a broad definition of an unlawful activity and acceptance of vague and unreliable evidence, all in the name of national security.
Salwa Judum: State sponsored militia set up in 2005 ostensibly to counter Maoist-led violence in mineral rich districts of Chhattisgarh, home to a large population of aboriginal groups now the predatory target of Indian and foreign multinational corporations. Many human rights groups and independent citizen’s groups such as Asian Center for Human Rights, International Association of People’s Lawyers, People’s Union of Civil Liberties/People’s Union for Democratic Rights/Association for the Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR) West Bengal, and Indian Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the Indian National Human rights Commission have documented the details of how Salwa Judum has been responsible for killing, looting, rapes and forced eviction of people from their homes to camps with inhuman conditions.
DGP Vishwaranjan: Highest ranking police officer in Chhattisgarh, consistent apologist for CSPSA, Salwa Judum
Related posts
FACT SHEET ON THE CASE OF DR BINAYAK SEN
(compiled by Ilina Sen, August 2008)
- Dr. Binayak Sen was arrested on May 14, 2007. He was charged under sections Section 2(b) (d), 8(1, 2 & 5) of the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005.of the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act (CSPSA), sections under Sections 10(a)(1), 20, 21, 38, 39.2(b) & (d) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 of the UAPA, and sections 121A and 120 B of the IPC.
- He continues to be incarcerated in jail despite widespread national and international public outcry. Bail application was dismissed by the Supreme Court without a reason being provided.
- In his trial which began a year after his arrest, and has been proceeding since May 2008, the state has produced no credible evidence or witnesses in support of his case, despite repeated dark claims of the existence of such. Evidence tampering and fabrication have been observed in court.
- Dr Sen is a 58 year old paediatrician and public health physician with a 25 year record of providing health care to the adivasi people of Chhattisgarh. His path breaking work has been recognized through the various awards, the Paul Harrison award from his alma mater, the CMC Vellore (2004), the RR Keithan Gold medal from the Indian Academy of Social Sciences (2007), and the Jonathan Mann Award for Health and Human Rights from the Global Health Council (2008).
- Dr Sen was also closely involved with civil liberties and human rights work- he was first drawn to this area through his investigations into hunger deaths and the causes of malnutrition in Chhattisgarh, the “Rice Bowl of India.” He was General Secretary of the state unit of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and its National Vice President. Read more
Related posts
September 26, 2008 | Filed Under articles | Leave a CommentKnow for yourself the Sinister ways of Chhattisgarh Police : Kavita Srivastava
DIARY NOTES
Events of the Third Phase of Dr. Binayak Sen’s Trial & Incidents Preceeding Ajay TG’s Bail
Since Dr. Sen’s trial is disproving the prosecution’s case the police is openly trying to fabricate evidence both inside and outside the court. The police even tried to use Ajay’s TG legitimate release against Dr. Sen, hence the events of both the cases have been written together
The third phase of the trial of Dr. Binayak Sen case began on the 29th of July and lasted till July 31st. The key witnesses, the material witnesses had already deposed in the first two phases of the trial and some were tendered off. The subsequent witnesses were to be mostly seizure witnesses or police and jail personnel. Since most of the 20 witnesses who had deposed in the first two rounds of the trial had in no way confirmed the police case, the prosecution in an act of desperation had filed an application of recalling three of the witnesses who had deposed in the second phase between the 1st of July and the 4th of July. This was slated for argument in the course of these three days.
This was also the period when it became clear that charge sheet was not being filed in the Ajay TG case and that statutory bail was imminent however, we were suddenly filled with the hope that perhaps the case itself would be closed as Ajay had not committed any criminal act and hence there was no evidence to that effect.
29th July. 2008
No hearing happened as a senior member of the bar had passed away. Before we reached the Court, Dr. Binayak Sen, Pijush Guha and Narayan Sanyal had been already taken away to the jail. We were very disappointed that we had missed him. Read more
Related posts
Binayak Sen and the Right to a Fair Trial
Mukul Sharma in Kafila
The right to a fair trial is a cornerstone of democratic societies. How a person is treated, when accused of a crime, provides a concrete demonstration of how far a State respects human rights. Detention is ‘arbitrary’, where there are often grave violations of the right to a fair trial. Detention and imprisonment, which may be lawful under national standards, are considered ‘unlawful’ under international standards. A fair trial is indispensable for the protection of other rights, such as the right to freedom from torture, the right to life, and the right to freedom of expression. This right should never be compromised. However, throughout the country, people are being detained and imprisoned without a fair trial. In these circumstances, many face torture and other forms of ill-treatment. The continued detention of Dr. Binayak Sen, Vice-President of India’s leading human rights organization, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), should trigger a debate, not only in Chhattisgarh, but also around the country, about whether and to what extent the right to a fair trial may be compromised in the name of security.
Dr. Sen was detained on 14 May 2007. However, charges were not filed properly for seven months. In the meantime, he was denied bail, and was kept in solitary confinement for three weeks in March-April 2008. Much delayed, his trial commenced on 30 April 2008 and was adjourned till July. Before the trial began, the presiding judge announced that only one human rights activist could attend the hearing at a time, though he later relented, making the trial public. In jail, Dr. Sen continued to suffer from severe gout, which posed difficulties for him to take care of his daily needs. He also suffered from frequent micturation, indicative of a prostrate problem. Despite appeals to organize proper medical treatment as per the jail rules, no concrete action came from the trial court. Before and during the trial proceedings, the prosecution and the police were attempting to intimidate the family members and colleagues of Dr. Sen. The police so far has not produced any evidence from the materials in its possession, including a computer hard disk that they had seized from Dr. Sen’s residence and clinic. The police have yet to return the computer disk, ten months after getting it examined from the Hyderabad-based Forensic Science Laboratory, giving rise to doubts that it was being tampered to manufacture evidence. On every occasion that Dr. Sen was brought to the court, there was massive police presence, leading to an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. Dr. Sen has been charged under several sections of the Chhattisgarh Public Security Act, 2005 (CSPSA), the Unlawful activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, and the Indian Penal Code. Both the CSPSA and the UAPA contain vague and sweeping definitions of ‘unlawful activities’, for which organizations may be rendered ‘unlawful’, such as ‘uttering words…which propound the disobedience of established law and its institutions’. If convicted, Dr. Sen could be sentenced to life imprisonment.
Abuse of the criminal process in a trial has a number of different, but related, aspects. Delay in the procedure, loss or destruction of evidence, abuse of power by the executive, use of unlawfully obtained evidence, prosecutor’s improper motives, denial of the rights of victims — these are some of the several serious concerns raised, regarding the everyday practices of the criminal justice system in the country. Delay is a cause of serious injustices in India. Lengthy periods of per-trial imprisonment, anxiety, expenses, loss of days and memory — all lead to a situation where the accused cannot get justice. Further, in criminal cases the prosecution has a virtual monopoly on investigation. It is therefore axiomatic that the prosecution should not be able to evade their duties of disclosure, by suppressing, loosing, preventing or destroying evidence. Prosecutions in various situations, including in conflict zones, are resulting in an abuse of power by the executive, where unlawfulness or breach of law by the State agents has made it virtually impossible to give the accused a fair trial. So many times the evidences are obtained unlawfully, the admission of which has an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings. Not only this, the circumstances in which evidences are obtained are crucial. For example, in any proceedings, international law strictly prohibits the admission of evidence of statements obtained by torture.
Against these methods, there are various kinds of international human rights standards, national laws and court judgments, relevant to fair trials. Impartial, constitutional bodies exist, that give authoritative guidance on how to interpret these standards. Pre-trial rights (the right to liberty, the right of people in custody to information, the right to legal counsel before trial, the right of detainees to have access to the outside world, the right to be brought promptly before a judge or other judicial officer, the right during interrogation, etc.), and rights at trial (the right to trial by a competent, independent and impartial court, the right to a fair hearing, the right to a public hearing, the presumption of innocence, the right to be tried without undue delay, the right to be present at trial and appeal, the right to call and examine witnesses, etc.), are many. Thus, assessing the fairness of a criminal trial, and establishing peoples’ rights is complex and multi-faceted. The severe shortcomings in our criminal justice system, and the unaccountability of the police, administration and judiciary, makes it virtually impossible to establish the right to a fair trial in contemporary India.
Related posts
August 23, 2008 | Filed Under articles | 2 CommentsPrison diaries of a suspected Naxal
Sreelatha Menon
EAR TO THE GROUNDBusiness Standard, August 10, 2008
Ajay TG, arrested on suspicion of being a Naxalite, plans a film on those who are jailed for no reason at all.
What does a film-maker do in jail? When it is Ajay TG, the jail becomes his muse, prompting to him stories about a man spending his time in jail for no reason at all, stories about 74 men like him in Durg jail who have been branded Naxalites.
For Ajay TG, arrested four months ago and released this week, the prison was a time to revisit the past three decades he spent in Bhilai since he left his village in Engandiyur in Thrissur district of Kerala as a 15 year old.
He came to Bhilai to join his father, who ran a petty business to keep afloat a large joint family back home. But he learned to wield the camera and worked for anthropologists like Jonathan Perry, who was researching on poverty amid industrialisation , and finally landed in jail after being accused of being a Naxalite.
Ajay TG was released this week after the Chhattisgarh police failed to gather enough evidence. The release was the culmination of a loud chorus of condemnation from film-makers like Adoor Gopalakrishnan and Mrinal Sen. It was a victory of illusion-makers as the Chhattisgarh police realised they were chasing an illusion.
Related posts
August 12, 2008 | Filed Under articles | Leave a Comment
-
Gallery
From freebinayaksen.org- Chief of Police of Indian State under Fire for Human Rights Record at Berkeley Conference
- Letter by concerned academics to the Director-General of Police, Chhattisgarh
- Scrap Salwa Judum : Brigandry in the name of self-defence
- UPDATE On Dr. Binayak Sen’s TRIAL (15 Sep 2008)
- The Right to a Fair Trial Compromised in the Name of Security: The Case of Dr. Binayak Sen
- Updates from Google News
- Chhattisgarh DGP under Fire for Human Rights Record at Berkeley ... - MyNews.in
- BINAYAK SEN - ZNet
- Dada (Original version - English) - MediaPart
- Spiritual guru offers to mediate between government, Maoists - Fresh News
- Community to protest Indian police official's participation in UC ... - World Sikh News
- Living to tell the tale of Tyranny - Express Buzz
- Reports From Indian Media
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.