PRESS NOTE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Srinagar, December 06, 2012
INTERNATIONAL PEOPLES TRIBUNAL ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND JUSTICE IN
INDIAN-ADMINISTERED KASHMIR [IPTK] / ASSOCIATION OF PARENTS OF
DISAPPEARED PERSONS [APDP]
announce the release of: alleged Perpetrators - Stories of Impunity in
Jammu and Kashmir at a press conference on Thursday, December 06, 2012,
in Srinagar, Kashmir [Report available at: www.kashmirprocess.org].
alleged Perpetrators a report by IPTK/APDP examines 214 cases of human
rights violations and for the first time, the role of 500 alleged
perpetrators in these crimes. The report is authored by Parvez Imroz,
Kartik Murukutla, Khurram Parvez, and Parvaiz Mata.
This report, prepared over two years using information gleaned mostly
from official State documents in addition to witness testimonies, in
cases available with IPTK/APDP, portrays the state of impunity prevalent
in Jammu and Kashmir. Where identities of individual perpetrators of
crimes are known it seeks a process of accountability for institutional
criminality. The State documents used range from police records,
judicial and quasi-judicial records and Government documents. IPTK/APDP
using the Right to Information legislations sought information on First
Information Reports, High Court petition numbers and other
Out of 214 cases a list emerges of 500 individual perpetrators, which
include 235 army personnel, 123 paramilitary personnel, 111 Jammu and
Kashmir Police personnel and 31 Government backed militants/associates.
Among the alleged perpetrators are two Major Generals and three
Brigadiers of the Indian Army, besides nine Colonels, three Lieutenant
Colonels, 78 Majors and 25 Captains. Add to this, 37 senior officials of
the federal Paramilitary forces, a recently retired Director General of
the Jammu and Kashmir Police, as well as a serving Inspector General.
The official designations of the alleged perpetrators and the
geographical spread of the crimes committed against the people of Jammu
and Kashmir indicate a decisive will of the Indian State, carried out by
its functionaries as part of a policy. The concept of individual
criminal responsibility is well established under international criminal
law. From Nuremberg to the United Nations ad hoc tribunals -- like the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia -- to the most recent, the
International Criminal Court [ICC], the focus of international law has
gradually moved from laying responsibility for crimes from the general --
the State -- to the individual -- the perpetrator.
Cases presented in this report reveal that there is a policy not to
genuinely investigate or prosecute the armed forces for human rights
violations. There is an occasional willingness to order compensatory
relief, but not to bring the perpetrators to justice. On the contrary,
alleged perpetrators of crimes are awarded, rewarded and promoted by the
The role of the judiciary in a conflict zone is a vital and, often, the
only hope available for ensuring justice. It must serve as an effective
check on the executive and be vigilant in ensuring that human rights of
individuals are not violated. Despite the occasional passing of strong
orders, this report contains numerous examples of the High Court
effectively condoning the continuation of violations. The general
experience in Jammu and Kashmir has been that judicial and
quasi-judicial authorities such as the State Human Rights Commission
[SHRC] have allowed themselves to be conscious of the power and will of
the executive, thereby rendering themselves subservient to the State.
The impunity fostered by the judicial processes have been compounded by
the existence of draconian laws such as the Armed Forces (Jammu and
Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 [AFSPA].
Based on the information before it, IPTK/APDP cannot conclusively
pronounce on the guilt of any of the alleged perpetrators, but it is
clear that enough evidence exists to warrant further investigations and
prosecutions. However, in the absence of any institutional or political
will to take the evidence to its natural conclusion -- a trial where the
crime and the guilt of a perpetrator can be proven beyond reasonable
doubt -- the Indian State stands indicted.
The Executive Summary and Tabular overview of the report are annexed.
Queries may be directed to:
E-mail: kparvez [at] kashmirprocess [dot] org