POLICING DISSENT: The Silencing of Speech in Chhattisgarh

Statement read out by Dipti Bhatnagar
Students for Justice in Chhattisgarh, UC Berkeley
The Berkeley Conference on Indian Democracy
Saturday 9/27, 2:00 pm
8th Floor, Barrows Hall

I appreciate this opportunity to express our views and ask some questions of Mr. Vishwa Ranjan, the highest police official of Chhattisgarh.

Others have talked about the broader issues, I wish to talk about the intimidation, the silencing of those who dare to speak out against the trampling of rights by the state. The best known example is perhaps Binayak Sen, an acclaimed doctor currently languishing in the Raipur jail. Binayak Sen has spent more than 25 years serving the poorest and the most marginalized communities of Chhattisgarh. He has also actively worked with these communities in their struggles to protect their rights and dignity, and is the national vice-president of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties. An outspoken critic of the Salwa Judum, and of the reign of terror spread by state forces in the name of countering the Maoist insurgency, what has been Binayak Sen’s reward? He gets arrested and thrown into jail by the police. Another political prisoner paying the price for having a conscience!

Sixteen long months later, Dr. Sen continues to be held behind bars. Why, you may ask? Well, first it took almost a year before the trial even started. And during this year he had to spend 3 weeks in solitary confinement, a confinement that was illegal, without court approval. Once the trial did start, the police was unable to present any credible evidence, and the prosecution witnesses, nearly two dozen so far, have turned hostile. So what do the police and prosecutor do? They start fabricating evidence. A mysterious letter appears in the supposedly sealed evidence bag produced in court. A letter not listed on the search memo or mentioned in the charge sheet. Not properly authenticated. Conveniently for the state’s case, this letter is from the Maoists, thanking Dr. Sen for his help.

Mr. Vishwa Ranjan, can you tell us why the police feel compelled to fabricate evidence?

Another, and related, case of intimidation by the state is that of Ajay TG, a young film maker and Binayak Sen’s colleague in the PUCL. Ajay’s mistake was making a film about the strange circumstances surrounding Binayak Sen’s arrest and incarceration. So of course, Ajay too was arrested as a threat to the security of the state. In this case, the police couldn’t even produce a charge sheet, even after 90 days, the statutory maximum period someone can be held without charge. But even though they had to let Ajay out on bail, the police haven’t given up.

Mr. Vishwa Ranjan, why have you not dropped the case if you still haven’t come up with a charge sheet against Ajay, 150 days after his initial arrest?

Of course, Ajay TG and Binayak Sen, are not isolated cases of critics being intimidated and harassed into silence by the police. Equally egregious, even if less visible, is the continuing reign of terror in the lives of large swaths of tribal communities in Chhattisgarh. One of the most blatant instances of state intimidation is the case of Nendra village in Dantewara. Villagers from Nendra had been attacked multiple times by the forces of Salwa Judum, had 150 dwellings burnt, 4 women raped and 27 inhabitants, including 9 children, killed. On 10th June 2008, they testified before the visiting fact- finding team from the National Human Rights Commission investigating Salwa Judum atrocities. Five days later, the Salwa Judum forces exacted revenge on this village by attacking it yet again and burning 11 homes. And the police response? They shrugged off this case of arson, saying that Nendra was abandoned and the houses were likely Maoist hideouts.

Mr. Vishwa Ranjan, can you tell us why the police cannot even guarantee the safety and security of witnesses testifying before a team sent into the state under orders from the Supreme Court?

In the name of fighting the Maoists, the police and administration in Chhattisgarh have turned the state into a human rights nightmare.

I, and the other groups and individuals I represent at this podium, demand the repeal of Chhattisgarh’s Black Laws, we demand that the Salwa Judum be disbanded, all political prisoners, including Dr. Binayak Sen be released by the state and democracy be restored in Chhattisgarh.

Thank you!

Supported by:

Alliance of South Asians Taking Action
Association for India’s Development
Campaign to Stop Funding Hate
Friends of South Asia
Hesperian Foundation
International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal
People’s Health Movement
Sanhati

Related posts

September 28, 2008 | Filed Under statements | Leave a Comment 

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?

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

September 27, 2008 | Filed Under Protests, articles | Leave a Comment 

Know 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

September 26, 2008 | Filed Under articles, trial updates | Leave a Comment 

UPDATE On Dr. Binayak Sen’s TRIAL (15 Sep 2008)

“QUESTIONS ON DR. BINAYAK SEN’S TRIAL”

Raipur, 15th September, 2008: The last dates of trial of Dr. Binayak Sen, General Secretary, Chhattisgarh PUCL were September 8th & 9th 2008. Strangely, nothing happened on these days, as the hon’ble Judge, Mr. B S Saluja, Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Raipur had gone on “Training”. So, the accused were brought from Raipur Central Prison only to sign on the Order Sheets.

The next dates are October 13, 14 & 15, 2008. During the past few months, concern has been expressed by almost everyone attending the Court’s proceedings as to the seriousness of the prosecution in conducting the Trial. Some Observers have expressed these concerns in writing. We are circulating here two Notes and Letters on Trial Observations.

One, by Kavita Srivastava, Secretary of National PUCL, and General Secretary, Rajasthan PUCL, who has been closely following the Trial Proceedings.
Two, by Dr. Abhay Shukla, a member of the CORE GROUP OF NGO’s of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).

These provide deep insights into violation of national and international standards set up for a Fair & Just Trial. We must not forget that Dr. Binayak Sen is also a “defender of human rights”. Read more

Related posts

September 26, 2008 | Filed Under Press Release, trial updates | Leave a Comment 

The other side: The screening of Ajay T.G.’s short films

The screening of Ajay T.G.’s short films and the accompanying talks raised uncomfortable questions on terrorism

Terrorism is a buzzword these days but how much attention do we pay to the concept of “state terror”? This was the discomfiting question raised during a screening of Ajay T.G.’s short films at Centre for Film and Drama (CFD) organised by Pedestrian Pictures. The Chhattisgarh government’s arrest of film-maker and human rights worker Ajay T.G. on the basis of alleged Maoist links has been creating a mini-storm in the country. The audience at CFD was sizeable—it spilled out of the seats and onto the stage—and the mood was, expectedly, solemn.

The screening began with some of Ajay’s earlier films on socio-political issues in Bhilai and Jharkhand and was rounded off by “Anjam”, the contentious film on Binayak Sen. It was interspersed with a talk by historian Ramachandra Guha and Arvind Narrain of the Alternative Law Forum.
Read more

Related posts

August 23, 2008 | Filed Under Press Reports | Leave a Comment 

Next Page →