
13 December 2016 (OMCT) -
The rule of thumb in the state of Manipur, in the north
east of India, is that the powerful can get away with anything – from arresting
people and searching their homes without a warrant to killing people.
That’s because six decades ago, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) granted the paramilitary forces and armed state police with special powers to combat
insurgency and ensure security in this “disturbed
area”, mostly inhabited by indigenous peoples of Tibetan-Burman and
Sino-Tibetan descent.
This legal
framework has licensed a catalogue of human
rights abuses within a “complete climate of impunity,” as explained by Babloo
Loitongbam, Executive Director of Human
Rights Alert, an organization that documents human rights abuses by
the Indian Security Forces in the region and seeks justice for the
victims. “Suspicion is enough for you to be shot by the military,” he said.
Members of the armed forces may not be prosecuted, and
an investigation cannot take place without the central Government granting its
permission, which, needless to say, has never happened in the past 60 years.
Yet Mr. Loitongbam’s team has had some wins. In 2007, the United Nations
Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination called upon
India to repeal the AFSPA and to replace it “by
a more humane Act” for it is discriminatory against the indigenous peoples of the region.
Small steps can make a difference
Yet with the Act still in place, between 2012 and 2013
alone, the insurgency in Manipur has led to the
death of about one
civilian per 100,000 people a year.
In this difficult context, Loitongbam’s organization
can only take small steps to uncover the gross violations and eventually
trigger change on a larger scale. One such victory occurred when it found
evidence reaching back to May 1979 of 1,528 cases of extrajudicial killings of
civilians by security forces, pushing India’s Supreme Court to appoint a
fact-finding committee to investigate six of these cases.
Despite the State’s claims that the people were killed
in so called “encounters”, or that they were “hardcore terrorists”, the Supreme
Court in 2016 found that no prior criminal charges had been filed against any
of them. It also ruled that “the use of excessive force or retaliatory
force” by the police or armed forces is not permissible, despite the AFSPA.
“This was the first time the Indian Supreme Court was
confronted with this mass of atrocities over this prolonged period of time,”
said Loitongbam. “After much courtroom drama, they were able to come with a
judgment.”
Even though the Court did not consider all the cases
presented to it, the ruling sent a message to potential perpetrators that there
is a limit to legally admissible behavior even with the AFSPA. Since then, the
number of extrajudicial killings has dropped dramatically, raising hopes for a
more peaceful future.
The ruling also allowed the public to learn what had
been happening in this remote part of the world. Until two years ago, the world
had been unaware of the extent and pervasiveness of the human rights violations
in Manipur because foreigners were not allowed to enter the area. A government
push to boost the local economy, which has been at the crossroads of exchange
with Asia for more than 2,500 years, has slightly relaxed this ban.
Using the law to help the faceless
Loitongbam, a lawyer who is also a Fulbright
Scholar and an Ashoka Life Fellow, believes that the power of the legal
system to end impunity.
“These institutions, which are meant to protect the
rights of democracy, have to stand up and assert themselves. This is what we
saw when the Supreme Court actually came out with the truth,” he said.
He recalled a story that explains his motivation for
what he does. One day while walking down the street a young man called out to
him and asked him to come home with him for a cup of coffee. Loitongbam was
skeptical at first, but was won over by the young man’s honest eyes.
“He said to me, ‘I have heard about you and had it not
been for you and your team I would not have been able to come home.’”
The young man had been involved in an insurgency movement
and was blacklisted by the military. He feared that instead of a trial and
conviction he would end up as yet another victim of an extrajudicial killing.
So he fled. But after this year’s Supreme Court ruling, a new climate had
emerged and the young man felt safe enough to return home.
“And he said even if they arrest me, at least I’ll be
able to make my case in the court, but two years ago I would have been killed,”
Loitongbam continued recounting the young man’s words.
“That evening I slept so well,” Loitongbam said. “These are just faceless people, people whom you don’t know, but they have benefitted from your work. You get so much satisfaction that you say to yourself that all of this sacrifice is worth it.”
This article is part of a
series of 10 profiles to commemorate International Human Rights Day, 10
December, and to recognize the vital role of human rights defenders worldwide.
To see the campaign video, please click here.

| Tweet |
English