Indian companies are most corrupt on Transparency Bribe Payers Index

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

NEW DELHI: In a global recognition to the "Much Merited Upper Class Rule", India has been ranked as the worst performer by Transparency International on its global Bribe Payers Index, which is based on the propensity of companies from the world's 30 leading exporting countries in bribing abroad. India has been ranked at the 30th position in the Transparency International 2006 Bribe Payers Index (BPI), with a score of 4.62. A score of 10 indicates a perception of no corruption, while zero means corruption is seen as rampant. India's major weapon supplier, Israel also ranked as one of the most bribing nation, with a score of 6.01. Israel accounted for 0.4% of global trade in 2005.

Upper castes — that is, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas — constitute less than 20 per cent of the Indian population but controles the business and civil service sector of the country. They claim perhaps 80 per cent of the jobs in the new economy, in sectors such as software, biotechnology, and hotel management. The large corporates and MNCs in India prefer candidates come from the upper caste families, so that they can get their jobs done using their contacts and networks. The scores of corruption among these groups explain why they want to shut every door for the Dalits and backward communities in the name of 'Merit'.

The BPI Index results draw from the responses of more than 11,000 business people in 125 countries polled in the World Economic Forum’s Executive Opinion Survey 2006. In first place Switzerland scored 7.81 points out of a possible 10 in the BPI. Israel tied with Hong Kong with 6.01 points (Hong Kong accounted for 2.8% of global trade in 2005). The US, which accounts for the 8.9% of global trade, the highest proportion, received a score of 7.22 points. China, with 5.5% of global trade, and India, with 0.9%, closed the list.

Under BJP's rule, India became Israeli arms industry's prized market and there were also reports in 2003, of the Israeli defense establishment dispatching "scores of agents" to persuade the Indian armed forces in to buying weapons resulting in large scale bribes among civil servants and politicians. The ideological bond between Zionism and Hindutva made India as the second largest trade partner for Israel in Asia, after China. It is currently working hard with their old "Hindutva bureacrats" to make India as their "biggest trade partner". Since the advent of Hindutva's grip on the Indian elite castes, every visit by a delegation of Israeli officials either preceded or followed the cementing of ties involving the purchase of weapons, or the training and/or expansion of cooperation between Israeli armaments interests and their Indian counterparts.

In 2005, Israel has achieved a four-fold increase in the bilateral trade with India which stood at $2.4 billion. Business Week reported in 2005 that India became Israel's largest importer of weapons the previous year, accounting for about half of the $3.6 billion worth of weapons exported by that country. Not coincidentally, that year also proved to be the second best recorded year for the Israeli weapons industry, making Israel the 5th largest weapons exporter in the world and accounting for about 10 percent of the world's weapons trade. Obviously the Israeli armaments industry values India as a major new market for its weapons, and as such has much to gain from maintaining and deepening the appetite for arms by the Indian state.

The international corruption watchdog on Wednesday said overseas bribery is still common among the world's export giants despite the existence of international anti-bribery laws, while companies from emerging export powers India, China and Russia are the worst performers. Switzerland has been ranked at the top slot with a score of 7.81, followed by Sweden, Australia, Austria and Canada at the top five positions on the index. The US and UK have been ranked at 10th and sixth positions respectively.

Transparency International said that Switzerland has managed a leading score of only 7.8, which is far from perfect. This indicates there might be variations here but there are no real winners, it added.

According to the report, businesses from India, China and Russia, who are at the bottom of the index, have the most propensity to pay bribes.

This year's BPI data shows that leading exporters are undermining the development with their dirty business practices overseas, while the foreign bribery by emerging export powers is disconcertingly high.

Companies from the wealthiest countries have been ranked in the top half, but they still routinely pay bribes, particularly in developing economies, it added.

"In the case of China and other emerging export powers, efforts to strengthen domestic anti-corruption activities have failed to extend abroad," the report said.

"Bribing companies are actively undermining the best efforts of governments in developing nations to improve governance, and thereby driving the vicious cycle of poverty," said Transparency International Chairwoman Huguette Labelle.

"It is hypocritical that Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) based companies continue to bribe across the globe, while their governments pay lip-service to enforcing the law," Transparency International CEO David Nussbaum said.

"The enforcement record on international anti-bribery laws makes for short and disheartening reading," he added.

"Domestic legislation has been introduced in many countries following the adoption of the UN and OECD anti-corruption conventions, but there are still major problems of implementation and enforcement," he added.

The index has been prepared on the basis of responses of more than 11,000 business people in 125 countries polled in the World Economic Forum's Executive Opinion Survey 2006.

The watchdog said that India consistently scores worst across most regions and sub-groupings, while China is the world's fourth largest exporter and ranks second to last in the Index.

Transparency International Chairwoman said, "With growing influence comes a greater responsibility that should constitute an opportunity for good."

"This is the right time for Russia, China and India to commit to the provisions of the OECD Convention against bribery and contribute to the vitality of tomorrow's markets. In doing so they will become part of the effort to make corruption history."

Transparency International says the countries can be divided into four groups. In the first group - those whose companies are least likely to pay bribes - are Switzerland (which came top in the survey), Sweden, Australia, Austria, Canada, the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, the US and Japan.

In the second group - somewhat more likely to bribe - are Singapore, Spain, the United Arab Emirates, France, Portugal and Mexico.

The third group - even more likely to bribe - are Hong Kong, Israel, Italy, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, South Africa and Malaysia.

Finally - and most likely of all to pay bribes - are Taiwan, Turkey, Russia, China and India (which came bottom in the survey).

Before countries near the top of the list start patting themselves on the back, it's worth noting that their companies often apply different standards, according to where they are doing business. "Companies from the wealthiest countries generally rank in the top half of the index, but still routinely pay bribes, particularly in developing economies," Transpency International says. It continues:

Even high scorers are in major need of improvement. The behaviour of the Australian Wheat Board in the UN oil-for-food programme is just one example.

In March of this year, German-US motor company DaimlerChrysler admitted that an internal probe confirmed allegations of "improper payments" made by their staff in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe.

Turkey, in 27th place, is nearly at the bottom of the BPI. This is a crucial result as the country pursues its bid for European Union membership. The poor score also raises troubling questions about the country's commitment to the OECD (Organisation of for Economic Cooperation and Development) Anti-Bribery Convention, which entered into force there in 2003 ...

The United States, which blazed new trails with its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, ought to be leading the way, but ranks behind many OECD countries.

The United Kingdom has demonstrated minimal enforcement of the Convention, despite scandals implicating firms such as British Aerospace.

Companies often try to shrug off bribes as a way of fitting in with local customs and practices, and there is a popular notion that the recipient, not the giver, is the guilty party. Apart from the fact that such payments are often illegal, they undermine any efforts to promote good governance in developing countries. Bribes also have a corrupting effect on the firms that pay them. Often, the payments are made by local subsidiaries - allowing parent companies to pretend that their hands are clean.

Transparency International warns:

Multinationals cannot be absolved of the corrupt activities of their foreign branches, subsidiaries or agents, and they must conduct due diligence before engaging with joint venture or alliance partners. The purchasing, export, and marketing and sales departments remain the business functions most vulnerable to bribery and corruption.

It adds:

The cost of a tarnished image "back home" can be immense. And companies with a culture of bribery overseas face a heightened risk of being undermined by the unethical acts of their own employees. In the long run, it pays for companies to take proper measures to end corrupt practices.

About 150 years ago, there were no Black Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) in the US, there were no rights for Blacks and there was no cultural influence from Blacks. But now, 75 Black CEOs are working in major US companies. On the contrary, there are no Dalits as CEOs in any private company in India today.

In 1930, the IBM Company in America gave reservation to Blacks, and at present almost all business houses there are accommodating Blacks, Native Americans, and Hispanics. Since the intention of our Govt. is not to empower Dalits otherwise on similar lines how US had done for Blacks and others, Dalits can be given participation in govt. contracts and the supply-chain of different articles. After millennia of oppression, it was the British in 1932 which gave reservation through the historic Poona Pact. English and public school education in India is undoubtedly out of reach for Dalits, and this is resulting in lack of English knowledge which is blocking Dalits to take up high profile jobs.

In India, the perception is that if you are a Backward then you do not deserve anything. And the worst is that the Backward is being touted as the hurdle to the ushering in the era of competitiveness. The reservation policy is only to deceive the rest that we have been properly taking care of the Backwards. But India is absolutely clueless about what results have been achieved through the huge money allocated and the policies being pursued for the development of SC/ST/BCs over the last 50 years. According to NSSO, Census of India and NFHS-II, 37 percent of Dalits living below poverty in India while 45 percent them don't know how to Read and Write. When any insurgent or terrorist strikes, the ready answer is: "foreign hands bent upon to destabilizing our social fabric and economy". If the reservation is introduced, our industrial giants would put the blame on reservations.

The Govt. of India protected our industry from foreign direct competition. Are they not reservations? If they talk of survival on the basis of "merit" then let the Indian market be open to foreign companies.
Who is to blame for the dismal performance of PSUs or their closure? Why do we forget that "meritorious" professionals are heading most of the PSUs since their inception? Why only PSUs enjoying a monopoly in the Indian economy are doing well? In whose interests a few PSUs (even the profit-making ones) are forced to either close down or are sold to private parties at a paltry sum?

When a person born Untouchable as per the Hindu caste system is condemned to carry the cross then why is this bogey of "merit" raised constantly by the educated elite? Let us not forget that a caste-ridden society like ours hardly provides a level playing field for a large section of Indian society. A person's station in life is largely determined by birth. In such a system, there is little space for "merit" and efficiency. The recruitment practices in the private needs scrutiny. The upper castes have been enjoying unstated birth-based reservation since centuries. And extending the benefits of reservation to Backwards at any cost can only neutralize this. When can we see 17.5% IAS officers from Dalits, 27.5% from backward communities and 7.5% from tribal?

Someone who is familiar with the Indian social fabric know the age old doctrine of exclusion legitimised and sanctified by the Brahminical ideology. This upper caste elite controles the Business and Civil Service structure in India, by culminating "Bribing" as a ‘routine matter’ in India's daily life. Transparency International's BPI Index proves how this dangerous ideology of "self purity and pollution" has extended its wings to the "Globalization of Corruption."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tehelka's three rules of graft for arms-dealers.
1. If it's a bit dodgy, do it in cash.
2. If it's unethical, outsource it.
3. If its totally illegal, do it through the MOD's licensing procedure.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Download the Transparency International Report from

http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/bpi_2006

Related Information

Transparency International India
Balwantray Mehta Vidya Bhawan-ASMA,
G. K. Part II,
New Delhi 48
Contact Person:
Dr S.K. Agarwal

Phone	+91-11-2922 4519
Fax	+91-11-2646 8025

Website: Transparency International India

In Defence of A Liberal Society

Saturday, 28 January 2006

OVER the past few weeks, different parts of India have witnessed an explosion of intolerance, censorship, hate-speech, and physical harassment of people who differ from the �mainstream�. This should shake all public-spirited citizens out of the smug assumption that Indian society is basically tolerant and mature, and that India has internalised the spirit of a liberal democracy, or at least embraced the rule of law and norms of minimum civility in the conduct of public life.Consider just three recent examples of intolerance.

In Maharashtra, where burning books has become a cult thanks to the quasi-fascist Shiv Sena, the government has banned yet another book on Shivaji by American scholar James Laine on the flimsy ground that he discusses the potentially competitive, complex relationship between Shivaji and his father. (When Laines last book was banned, goons attacked the prestigious Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, destroying invaluable ancient manuscripts.) In Tamil Nadu, another state with a century-long history of social reform, chauvinists have been busy attacking actress Khushboo for making the perfectly sensible statement that young women should take precautions when engaging in pre-marital sex which, a survey shows, is widely prevalent. They have declared Khushboos views incompatible with the �Tamil ethos�.

Equally distressingly, Film Censor Board chairperson Sharmila Tagore invited the Defence Minister and the Defence services chiefs to vet Aamir Khan�s Rang De Basanti, which is woven around the lives of MiG-21 pilots. The apparent purpose was to reassure the Defence forces that the film doesn�t throw uncomplimentary light on the poor safety record of that accident-prone aircraft. This is shocking. The MiG-21, unfondly called the 'Flying Coffin'in Indian Air Force parlance, does have a horrible record of failures and crashes. The IAF has lost no fewer than 320 MiG-21s, a number higher than its entire aircraft inventory today.

However, that's not the real issue. The pertinent point is that the services chiefs have no business to vet a film because it deals with defence matters. The army chief wants the minister depicted in the film not to be identified as the Defence Minister and the movie not to be dedicated specifically to dead MiG-21 pilots, but to all the IAF�s dead pilots.

Now, the armed forces, like all other institutions and organs of the state, have their place in our democracy. They perform an important job in defending our borders and providing emergency relief. But they are gravely mistaken to demand they be deified and lionised, and never criticised. That can only create an unhealthy cult of military hero-worship. Even countries not known to be particularly liberal 'for example, the United States 'don't subject films critical of war (like Catch-22, Apocalypse Now, or The Deer Hunter) to censorship by the military. Ms Tagore is one of the more sensible of our film personalities. It�s unfortunate that she set a bad precedent 'probably out of good intentions. But intentions are not as important as her principal task 'which is to defend the independence of the arts.

However, all these lapses pale beside the egregious police attacks under way on homosexual men and lesbian women in Uttar Pradesh, which are driving women to the brink of suicide. A month ago, the UP police disgraced themselves when they rounded up and beat up amorous couples in parks in Meerut �although they had not indulged in obscene acts. Now, they have surpassed themselves by arresting four homosexuals in Lucknow and fabricating the charge that they were running an on-line gay network 'which is not a crime. The real reason for this harassment is crass prejudice against gays.

Lucknow�s police chief, Mr Ashutosh Pandey has committed an egregious offence. He invoked, perhaps the first time in decades in Northern India, Section 377 of the IPC to arrest gays. He is brazenly homophobic and hates sexual �deviance�.

Section 377 is a throwback to Victorian morality, itself hypocritical. It should have been removed from the IPC decades ago. It criminalises �carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal.'This 'order'is a bogus, unscientific and egregious concept. Worse, it�s an invitation to tyranny in the name of �higher'social mores. Heterosexuals constitute a majority in society. But they have no right to impose their preferences upon those who have different inclinations. Every adult has an inviolable right to his/her sexual preference and the freedom to exercise that preference and experience pleasure.

India belongs to the not-so-free group, along with countries with unflattering human rights records like Israel, Singapore, Sudan and Nigeria and much of the rest of sub-Saharan Africa. Even the US, a highly conservative society, belongs to the upper end of the same group. The recent happenings show the ugly, gross, uncivilised, even barbarian, side of India. This should concern us all for a simple reason. A modern, enlightened, democratic society is based on fundamental rights. These are not granted or bestowed by the state. They are intrinsic, inherent to human beings. The most basic of these rights is the right to life and limb. A persons body is inviolate. No agency, institution or individual can inflict harm upon it without breaking a fundamental freedom. The right to privacy, including the pursuit of one�s sexual preferences, is linked to the right to one�s body, and to another fundamental right, namely, the freedom of thought, belief and expression.

Fundamental rights cannot be suppressed or abridged in the name of some �higher'consideration such as 'mainstream'morality and majority 'sensitivity'. Those who do so practise the worst form of majoritarianism, which is the anti-thesis of democracy. They indulge in hate campaigns and mob violence, which are indistinguishable from medieval witchhunts: you name a person a witch or the devil�s agent and stone her or him to death. If India is to lay claim to a minimal level of civilisation and aspire to a liberal-democratic culture, it must not tolerate such crass intolerance, bigotry and violence. That aspiration will only be fulfilled when enlightened citizens speak up for freedom and liberty.

Praful Bidwai, Jan 26, 2006, Copyright Navhind Papers & Publications Ltd.

http://www.navhindtimes.com/stories.php?part=news&Story_ID=012614

India's police force today has assumed the character of goondas in uniform

D R Goyal Delhi

Justice and free play are challenged when confronted with opposition. Violent regimes invite violent opposition, but violence instead of being countered is escalated. Gandhi believed in dialogue with the opponent as the first step. When argument and reasoning failed, he called for mass action, but that too was non-violent.

A democracy won through such means has failed to keep its tryst. The case of the police is a case in point. In the colonial era, it was meant to keep the natives in check. Now it serves to keep the marginalised from spilling into the space meant for the new rulers.

The police lathicharge on protesting industrial workers in Gurgaon, which is just a few odd kilometers away from India's capital, raised fundamental questions about whether the police forces are law enforcers or musclemen of big industrialists. Recently, the police lathicharged a students demonstration demanding students elections in their university. A democratically organised protest expressing a democratic right is met with repression and violence.

Similarly, the role of the police has repeatedly come up after each episode of communal violence in the country. In the anti-Sikh violence in 1984, apart from politicians who engineered the violence, the guilt also falls on the police force that either remained silent, or participated in the crimes. Gujarat 2002 was a marker in terms of impunity. Instead of protecting victims, the police wase on the side of the killers and arsonists. Some policemen refused to register FIRs; instead complainants were arrested on fabricated charges. Investigations were not properly conducted, so when cases came up before the court, the police did not help the prosecution.

The police which is so active against citizens is lethargic in relation to violence against women and children at best; at worst it itself engages in acts of violence against those
citizens it is meant to protect. It hounds and intimidates those at the receiving end of society, and wields its baton. The police hounds democratic dissenters and finds ways of intimidating them, killing them in "encounters", arresting people from their homes at night and giving rise to slogans such as "Indian state, police state".

Then there is the question of VIP security, which is assuming almost ludicrous proportions. A one-time security officer attached to Jawaharlal Nehru narrated Nehru's response to a briefing on his security drill: "How can you protect me if the people whom I claim to represent cannot protect me?" That brings to mind the fact that the leaders who have been assassinated, Prime Ministers Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi, Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh and Delhi MP Lalit Maken had fallen either to the bullets of those deployed for their security or in spite of them. The system has robbed the ordinary citizen of security without guaranteeing the safety of their representatives. VIP security becomes a wall between leaders and their constituency.

Women find the capital city unsafe as there are frequent reports of abductions and rapes and the police are seen to be either conniving with the heinous act or failing to do its duty. The defence offered on behalf of the force was inadequacy of numbers because a large part of the force in the capital is deployed for the security of VIPs and VVIPs. There is no dearth of reports in which policemen are accused of committing crimes ranging from theft to rape. That being the case, how will larger numbers make the citizens of democratic India safer?

One way out is to train the police again, from the lowest to the highest levels, to remind them of their duties and responsibilities in the world's largest democracy. The country's elite also need to be reminded that the police is not their private force. People of a democracy have to feel included, though not at the cost of vigilantism.

http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/portal/2005/09/123

India does not need web-cops

PAVAN DUGGAL, Monday, February 13, 2006, Financial Express.

The recent developments in China concerning censorship of the Internet have once again brought to the forefront the entire issue relating to Net censorship. I believe that the Internet is possibly one of the most important developments in human history after the advent of fire. Internet has changed the way we all perceive, think, learn, do commerce and govern our self. Internet today is the manifestation of expression of free speech and is a common repository for all sources of knowledge and information.

I have strongly advocated against any kinds of Net censorship and there are valid reasons for doing the same. The Internet represent the inherent medium symbolising the freedom of expression of thought and speech. Any restriction on Net amounts to restriction on freedom to share and express ideas and opinions freely. Net censorship works against the basic string of principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Even otherwise, the architecture of Internet is such that a foolproof policing of information or data being shared on the Net cannot be done. Today, Internet has become an integral part of our life. It’s no more a medium for the privileged class of the society only. Even a common man uses this medium to access information. For example, a litigant can get information regarding his or her case just by a click of the mouse or a farmer can access information about the rates of his crop in the worldwide market. So, in another way this medium has also become a means to empower the marginalised section of the society.

In the context of Indian economy it would not be any exaggeration if it is said that, one of the major reason for this phenomenal growth of the economy is Internet. In fact this medium is more useful for the common public as it makes information available at a minimal cost to their doorstep thereby saving their time, money and energy. As such, it would not be in the interest of any country to look at the issue of Net censorship. In any way, given the dynamic nature of internet as a mass medium to share and express ideas, opinions, it would not be possible for any country to impose censorship of internet for a long period of time. Many countries have tried to censor some particular sites but given the enormity of cyberspace it has turned out to be a futile exercise.

Today, Internet stands for freedom of speech and expression. As far as India is concerned, Article 19 of the Constitution guarantees Freedom of Speech and Expression and the same is applicable for the Internet also.This right can only be curtailed under specified circumstances mentioned in Article-19. As per Article 19, the Government can impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right to Freedom of speech and Expression in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence. Net censorship violates the fundamental rights of freedom of speech and expression, guaranteed under the Indian constitution.

By and large, the Indian government has been very supportive of this medium and used this medium as a means of development. In a couple of cases, the government has tried to block certain websites and has realised that blocking of any site on the internet is an ineffective phenomenon and invariably, lands up giving far more mileage and attention to the blocked website, that what it would have ordinarily received in the ordinary course of business. It's very clear that there is no alternative to the Internet.

The author is a Supreme Court advocate specialising in cyberlaws.

http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=117393

Encounters : Fact and Fiction

With the focus on Sukhwinder Singh Sukhi, a former terrorist ‘rehabilitated’ by the Punjab police, the ghost of terrorism — because of the methods adopted to counter it — has once again come to haunt Punjab. Prabhjot Singh reports

Wassan Singh Zaffarwal with cops after his “surrender”

Terrorism, according to an adage, never dies. There could not be a better example than Punjab where the smouldering of its remnants frequently become apparent in debates, both in and outside the state assembly, over the root causes as well as methodology adopted in combating the turbulence that took more than 20,000 lives in a little over two decades of the last millennium.

Late last year while the state legislature debated for several hours over the root causes of terrorism, focus shifted to "questionable" methodology adopted by the security forces in putting down the armed conflict. A renewed debate was witnessed in the Punjab Vidhan Sabha during a special call-attention motion during the Budget session last month.

The provocation came from the media revelation that a "slain" terrorist-turned cat, Sukhwinder Singh "Sukhi", has been living a comfortable life under an assumed name with the blessing of the Punjab police. The entire Opposition and various human rights organisations went on the offensive against the Congress government and the Director-General of Police arguing that there could be no better evidence of the state "abetting" terrorism than the Sukhi case.

K.P.S. Gill: Defends his men DGP S.S. Virk: Leading from front J.F. Ribeiro: Bullet for bullet Sukhwinder Singh Sukhi: Brings alive the ghosts of past

"Sukhi as an individual case is not important. For me, it is the Sukhi issue which is more important," says the Director-General of Police, S.S. Virk, maintaining that as a head of the police force, he is morally duty-bound to own up all such action taken by the security forces in restoring normalcy in the trouble-torn state.

"Instead of keeping quiet, I thought I would lead the force from the front and defend the actions of the security forces taken in the interest of the country in general and Punjab in particular," he adds.

Interestingly, of all former Punjab police chiefs who remained a part of the fight against terrorism, only supercop, K.P.S Gill, stood by Virk as the Sukhi controversy threatened to blow the veil over "all is normal in Punjab." The silence of other police officers, holding a varied view point on combating terrorist violence is intriguing. As before, Punjab police continues to be vertically divided on its handling of terrorism.

And as chance would have it, the Sukhi issue came up when another cop, a middle-rung officer, Daya Nayak of Mumbai police, known as ‘encounter specialist’, was arrested for acquiring property and assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.

Both K.P.S Gill and S.S.Virk admitted that some known hardcore terrorists were won over and used in the fight against terrorism and Sukhi was just one example. They also agreed that there has been no counter-terrorism doctrine available to guide forces in the country. Observations made by Gill in his letter to Chief Minister, Amarinder Singh, in defence of Virk are not only important but significant.

Says Gill, "In the protracted periods of terrorist and insurgent violence in different parts of the country, the geographical scope of which has been expanding, certain practices have emerged and become established in combating and eradicating terrorism. Successive prime ministers in the country have had no reservations or compunctions against entering into direct negotiations with active and surrendered terrorists in their search for solutions.

"The use of the surrendered terrorists and the provision of alternative identities to protect them are integral to anti-terrorist and anti-organised crime campaigns across the world, and had been used extensively and openly in the Punjab," wrote Gill.

Interestingly, most of ‘trusted’ police officers of Gill’s regime had built their "own armies of cats — of men drawn from the fold of terrorists — besides a team of ruthless and tough officers for all anti-terrorist operations in their respective areas."

It were members of this army of "young police officers" that unveiled a strong offensive against terrorism in the state to earn the wrath of not only various human rights organisations and media for transgressing the laws of the land, including the rule of law, but also the unsavory title of "ruthless or extra judicial killers" for which many of them are still facing prosecution.

Many of them went to jail, were refused bail, stood trial and faced prosecution in various courts for their "over enthusiasm, extra-judicial actions and for overstepping their limits in denying human rights to their captives, the so-called terrorists." These police officers and men of their "special senas or armies" belonged not only to Punjab police but also from Central police organisations, including the Border Security Force and Central Reserve Police Force. There were some sprinkling of police officers drawn from other states, including Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.

Interestingly, in cases such as Sukhi’s, where militants were "shown killed", some police officers got "gallantry" awards.

In certain cases, one or other "most wanted militant" was killed in more than one ‘encounter.’ And all this was accepted as part of the wider strategy of fighting terrorism. Officers and security forces sought protection under the proviso that "no suit, prosecution, or other legal proceedings shall be instituted except with the prior sanction of the state government against any person in respect of anything done or purporting to be done in the exercise of powers conferred upon them" by the Punjab Disturbed Areas Act, the Armed Forces (Punjab and Chandigarh) Special Powers Act, and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act.

It was this proviso that generated a conflict between security forces on the one hand and human rights organisations on the other when it came to determining whether the former had sweeping powers to resort to "extra-judicial killings." They also prepared their lists of officers and men assisting security forces in letting loose state repression. Incidentally, many of the young officers who were entrusted the responsibility of eliminating the menace of terrorism from the state figured in their list. Though peace has returned to the state, some of them are still facing trial. No matter, a part of "secret funds" was placed at the command of the litigation wing of the Punjab police to help, assist and fight cases of all such officers. Needless to say, seniority or continuity in service was maintained in cases of all those officers who went to jails before being finally acquitted.

In 1997, when an officer acknowledged for his bravery in the fight against terrorism, Ajit Singh Sandhu, committed suicide by jumping before a train, K.P.S. Gill shot a four-page letter to the then Prime Minister, Inder Kumar Gujral.

"I have maintained a silence on events in Punjab for over two years in the hope that the leadership of the nation will do justice, now that peace has returned to the state, to those brave men and women who made this peace possible.

"Recent events, however, force me to speak out now: a continued silence on my part would be a betrayal of trust, an abdication and responsibility. I cannot remain silent when the memory of the men who sacrificed their lives under my command is denigrated; and when those who have survived the greatest of dangers and immeasurable sacrifices in campaign during a virulent proxy war are subjected to an unprecedented and unprincipled inquisition," wrote Gill.

"For over a decade, to wear a police uniform in Punjab was to proclaim yourself a wilful target for professional terrorist attacks. Yet thousands of men in uniform stood as a bulwark of democracy against the unconstrained depredations of the extremists. Further, wrote Gill, "the question repeatedly asked in this context is, ‘Were there any police excesses?’ Only a liar or fool would deny that random excesses occurred in a campaign of the magnitude and duration of the struggle in Punjab. Wherever such excesses were detected, action was inevitably taken. The real question is whether a strategy of state terrorism was adopted by the police, and the answer is unequivocally in the negative."

In the fight against terrorism, Punjab resorted to different tactics. The then police chief, J.F. Ribeiro, made that historic proclamation of "bullet for bullet" after terrorists had attacked a police party inside the Jalandhar district courts complex to get their accomplices released. The success story of Punjab police was scripted through the likes of Sukhi who not only acted as "spotters" but actively assisted security forces in "eliminating" the most wanted terrorists. In the post-Operation Bluestar era there was a considerable movement from villages, especially in border districts, to Pakistan. Hundreds of youth were detained in jails in Lahore and Faisalabad as only handful was picked as "suitable" for training by ISI sleuths. In 1985, when the government, headed by Surjit Singh Barnala, assumed office in Punjab, many of these wanted to be back, for peaceful rehabilitation. It remained a nightmare as Pakistan was not willing to release them. An attempted jailbreak case in Faisalabad saw police opening fire in which one Punjabi boy, Gurdeep Singh, was killed. Pakistan authorities relented and allowed these illegal detainees to return in small groups in early 1986.

The Sarbat Khalsa on January 26, 1986, saw the proclamation for Khalistan being made. Formation of a few terrorist organisations and Panthic Committees followed in the subsequent months. In 1986, when the National Security Guards and Punjab police launched a combined operation to clean up the Golden Temple complex, 550 youth were rounded up of which nearly 300 were let off.

The government kept its doors open and welcomed those who wanted to return to the mainstream. The process of rehabilitation, without any incentive, was put in place. In 1986, only 38 surrendered. There was none in 1987 or 1988. The build-up continued and on May 9, 1988, the present DGP, S.S. Virk, was injured when he was fired upon in the Golden Temple complex in the aftermath of Operation Black Thunder I. Twelve militants were killed, nearly 200 others arrested.

It was during this period that the support base of militants spread among intellectuals and sympathy groups. Political consolidation witnessed with election to the Lok Sabha of Simranjit Singh Mann, Dhyan Singh Mand, Atinderpal Singh, Bimal Khalsa and Sucha Singh among others was an opportunity for a negotiated settlement or early end to bloodshed. Unfortunately, it was frittered away. True, Punjab has been a case of missed opportunities.

It was in 1986 that BSF and CRPF were inducted in Punjab in a major way. Before that, in 1985, the Akali govt set up a three-member committee, headed by Justice A.S. Bains, to scrutinise pending cases against militants. The panel recommended the release of 1036 detained youth.

Subsequently, during the Congress government of Beant Singh in Punjab, 986 persons had surrendered, of which only 15 were hardcore. During the Akali-BJP regime between 1997 and 2002, the number of those surrendered was just 20, including six the highest, in 1998.

Interestingly, the police also resorted to yet another strategy in which surrenders were "engineered" as arrests. Most of these took place during the SAD-BJP government and included the arrest of most dreaded terrorist of late 1980s and early 1990s, Wassan Singh Zaffarwal, who also headed one of several Panthic Committees. Even the arrest of Dr Sohan Singh, another Panthic Committee chief, took place during this period.

The surrender and subsequent rehabilitation programme was not as successful as expected. Some of the surrendered militants, including Baldev Singh Hothian, Ranjit Singh Rana (a brilliant student, who had trained to be a lawyer), Harminder Singh Sandhu (All-India Sikh Students Federation Secretary) and Rajinder Chodha (a Hindu turned baptised Sikh), for example, who fell to bullets of their fellow militants after their release. Others released from Jodhpur jail, including hijackers of an Indian Airlines flight from Chandigarh, got into the mainstream. Two of them, including Amarinder Singh, were from Chandigarh. Amarinder Singh later was elected as a member of the SGPC.

While those who surrendered above ground or publicly faced a plethora of problems, including pressure from militant organisations, to return to the fold, a few, (who were more enterprising) were assimilated in the security forces as cats.

It was these "militants" who scripted success for security forces. The process, guarded and secretive in the first place, has always remained shrouded in controversies which continue to linger and evoke bitterness over any reference to terrorism in Punjab.

The Tribune, Sunday, March 12, 2006

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060312/spectrum/main1.htm

In India two students vanish after being taken into police custody

Vishav Bharti, Ohmynews.com,2006-08-19

The disappearance of two young men after being taken into police custody in India -- twice -- has their parents up in arms. They have met with the government, and the police. But no one seems to be listening.

The state of Andhra Pradesh is a traditional base for the Maoist movement. Last year, during peace talks between the Maoists and the government, the Maoists gunned down Narsi Reddy, a member of the legislative assembly. In response to Narsi Reddy's murder, the police registered a case against two college teachers and four students.

Malesh Bandari and Manohar Vadera, two of the students wanted by the police, are from the city of Mehboob Nagar. Both attended a prestigious institute in the region, Malesh for physics, Manohar for science.

Their parents, frightened of the police in Andhra Pradesh, accompanied their sons when they went to see the superintendent of police, Shirinivasan Reddy. The superintendent promised them that both boys would be released soon, after the investigation.

When a week had gone by, and the police had neither released the boys nor produced them in court, the parents became worried. They filed a writ in court. Acting on the writ, the judge ordered the police to produce the boys. Eight days after being jailed, the boys were finally produced in court for the trial. One could easily assess the "treatment" they had received while in police custody. They could hardly walk.

During the trial, the court sent both of them to jail. Months later, on March 5, they were finally granted bail.

Police officials, angry that the boys had been bailed out, allegedly threatened the parents, saying that the boys would be killed if they were released. Braving the threats, the parents deposited a guarantee to get the boys out of jail.

Later, in a pamphlet distributed at a conference in Delhi, the parents said that although an auto rickshaw had been hired to bring the boys home from jail, they never made it. It is alleged that the police stopped it and dragged Malesh and Manohar into a jeep.

"After that they were never seen," the pamphlet said.

When the parents met with high police officials to protest the re-arrest, the officials denied having any information about their whereabouts.

"We don't know anything after their release from jail. They might have joined the Maoists," said one official.

On April 18, however, the Maoists issued a public statement in which they denied that Malesh and Manohar had joined them.

Although frustrated, the parents have refused to leave any stone unturned. They have met with members of the legislative assembly, leaders of political parties, and high officials in the home ministry. The case has even made its way into the state legislative assembly of Andhra Pradesh. But to no avail.

When a member of the Indian Parliament, Vithal Rao, talked to Superintendent of police Reddy about the re-arrest, the superintendent assured him that the boys would be released within two or three days -- contrary to what the police had been claiming all along, that the boys were released a couple of months ago. But the boys have not turned up.

"The state police have swallowed our children in front of our eyes, like a hawk grabs the chicks. A hen is better than we are as she struggles to protect her chicks under her feathers. We could not even do that as the police stuffed the barrels of guns in our mouths," the parents wrote in an open letter.

"If they have killed our children, and can't return them alive," they said, "at least return their corpses."
©2006 OhmyNews

India's "colonial" justice system threatens rights

Tue Sep 26, 2006

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India must do more to transform its "British colonial-era" criminal justice institutions as it fights terrorism or it will breach human rights, a report by a U.S. advocacy group said on Tuesday.

The report, published by the Committee on International Human Rights of the New York City Bar Association, says India made a good start two years ago when it partially repealed the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002 (POTA).

India was also right to resist the temptation to bring such a law back after July's deadly Mumbai train bombings in which more than 180 people died, focusing instead on upgrading its intelligence capacity, the report said.

"Respect for human rights when combating terrorism is a strategic imperative," Anil Kalhan, chairman of the committee's India project, said in a statement.

"As the Supreme Court of India has recognised ... draconian laws often provide terrorists exactly the response they hope for and, in the process, plant the seeds for future violence."

But POTA was not entirely done away with -- a recent report by Amnesty International says hundreds of people originally detained under POTA continue to languish in prisons without trial.

Laws similar to some of those found in POTA now exist in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the report says, going on to call for their repeal.

One of the committee's main worries is that such laws give undue powers to India's police force - an institution it says has barely modernised since the British colonial era.

The result, it says, is that Indians are being held in custody for long periods without charge or trial and are facing torture, with those from the lower castes and from religious minorities being particularly vulnerable to abuse.

The report, available at www.nycbar.org , advises India to work with international institutions to ensure greater transparency in its criminal justice system.

In a country where bribes, intimidation and physical violence riddle particularly the lower rungs of the criminal justice system, the report urges Indians be given greater powers to hold government officials accountable for human rights abuses.

India Continued detention two years after the repeal of POTA : Amnesty

Thursday, 21 September 2006 Amnesty International expresses concern that, two years after India’s decision to repeal the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) in response to widespread abuse, hundreds of persons detained under POTA continue to languish in jails without trial and several are undergoing trials for breaching a flawed and now defunct law.

POTA was in force for almost three years, from 2001 to 2004. Under this law, people could be arrested on mere suspicion and detained without charge or trial for six months. The law also allowed for special investigation, as well as special courts and trial procedures.

Amnesty International recalls that, on 21 September 2004, the new government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh fulfilled one of its key election pledges to repeal POTA and to amend existing laws in recognition that POTA had been used to target political opponents, minorities and marginalised sections of the Indian society.

At that time, the Indian government gave a commitment to complete, within a year, its review of cases pending under POTA. Nevertheless, a large number of POTA detainees continue to languish across Indian jails. A majority of cases have been reviewed by committees set up for the purpose, but the review process itself has come under question, with a number of state governments including of the western state of Gujarat, contending that state prosecutors had the powers to reject the committees’ recommendations to drop POTA charges in key cases.

Also, except for a few high profile cases including the one relating to the December 2001 attack on the Indian parliament, convictions under POTA have been rare; in a number of cases, charges under POTA remain to be filed and, for several persons under detention, trial proceedings are yet to see the light of the day.

There are conflicting figures about the number of persons still detained under POTA.

According to the government, 135 such persons are still in jail, but human right activists insist that at least 400 persons remain under detention. Amnesty International can verify that a minimum of 265 persons remain under detention, either without a trial or at pre-trial stage (The number of persons convicted under the act is small, but these convictions pertain to serious and high-profile cases).

For instance, official figures given by the government leave out the 21 suspected Maoist sympathisers, who have now been detained for 46 months in the southern state of Tamil Nadu where POTA was known to target political opponents. In Gujarat, where POTA is known to have been widely used to target the Muslim minority, there have been reports that the number of those detained could be as high as 200 as against the official figure of 87.

Also, the Gujarat government has chosen to contest, in the Supreme Court, the review committee’s decision to drop POTA cases against certain defendants, including the case relating to the Godhra train fire tragedy in 2002 (The Godhra train fire tragedy set the communal riots during which more than 2,000 persons, a majority of them Muslims, were killed in the state).

The POTA repeal has justified Amnesty International’s concerns, expressed at the time of its framing, that this legislation did not conform to the principle of certainty in criminal law, lacked pre-trial safeguards and safeguards of the rights of defendants during trials, and posed a threat to the freedom of association and expression (The Prevention of Terrorism Bill 2000: Past abuses revisited?, June 2000, AI Index: ASA 20/22/2000; India: Briefing on the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, November 2001, AI Index: ASA 20/49/2001).

Amnesty International notes that the Indian authorities continue to remain wary of arming themselves again with a POTA-like legislation despite repeated demands to do so after the recent blasts at Mumbai and Malegaon in the western state of Maharashtra. Amnesty International deplores any attack deliberately targeting civilians and any other indiscriminate attack, but maintains that ordinary criminal laws sufficiently enable the authorities to deal with these crimes.

Amnesty International therefore urges the government to drop all cases under POTA and immediately release all individuals held without charge under POTA, unless in those cases where it decides, expeditiously, to transfer them to ordinary courts to face ordinary criminal charges. Even in such cases, continued detention should be the exception rather than the rule, and trials must meet international standards of fairness.

Time spent in detention should be counted towards time served. The trial, conviction and sentences imposed in cases already completed must be reviewed in light of the provisions and requirements of ordinary criminal laws and of international standards of fairness.

The same principles should apply to those still detained or imprisoned under the earlier Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA), a decade after it lapsed.

Background

POTA’s provisions originally came into force in the form of a Presidential decree, known as the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) in October 2001, soon after the September 11 attacks on the United States and the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 1373 instructing states to take steps against terrorism. In March 2002, the Indian parliament passed POTA; the act was in force till September 2004, a month before it was to have lapsed.

In the three years of its existence, a total of 217 cases were reportedly investigated under POTA; trials in 116 of these cases were either completed or are ongoing. Around 3,500 persons in 18 Indian states (including a few children in Jharkhand and Tamil Nadu) were held under POTA for varying periods of time. Gujarat is the state with the highest number of detentions and all but one of the 287 people initially held under the act were Muslims.

POTA’s predecessor was the TADA, or the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. This act was allowed to lapse in 1995, following widespread criticism that it was used widely against peaceful political opponents, human rights defenders minorities and marginalised sections of Indian society. Around 77,000 persons had been arbitrarily arrested under TADA and thousands were tortured with a view to extracting confessions from them. Of those arrested, around 72,000 were later released without having been charged or tried. A decade after the TADA lapsed, 147 persons are under detention for offences under that Act, including some held in connection with high profile cases for which trials are still ongoing.

Successive Indian governments have enacted a variety of security legislation at state and federal levels. In the last few decades, legislation including the National Security Act, the Disturbed Areas Act, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act and the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act have spawned abuses.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL Public Statement ,

AI Index: ASA 20/026/2006 (Public)
News Service No: 243 Dated on 20 September 2006

A State at War With its People

Anything goes against the Maoist insurgency in Central India

Vishav Bharti, Oh My News, 2006-07-06

Rivers like the Godavri and Mahanadi sing folk songs for the beautiful hilly forests of Dantewada district of Chhatisgarh in central India. Numerous rivulets add their charming music to them. People there have precious tribal narratives and culture enriched with the folklore of Birsa Munda, a young tribal revolutionary who achieved martyrdom struggling against British colonial rule.

Dantewada district is sparsely populated with Gond tribes. People there are completely dependent on agriculture and forestry. They are the original inhabitants of the region. But on a big chunk of their land they have no land rights, as forest officials lord it over two-thirds of the district.
Ninety-five per cent of the villages in the district have no basic medical facilities. Only 23 villages have government-sponsored ration shops. Malaria and starvation deaths are common.

In the early 1980s, Maoists first exposed the abuses in this region with the slogan "Jal Jangal Jameen Hamara Hai" (the water, land, and forests belong to us). They organized people against corrupt government functionaries, exploitative traders, and moneylenders. They took the initiative in various public welfare schemes, from fishing and modernizing agriculture to providing medical facilities and education. As a result, a big chunk of central India is completely under their control.

Some reports claim about 92,000 sq km (35,521 sq miles) as Maoist-controlled. According to official estimates, as far as their strength on the ground is concerned, Maoists have about 10,000 armed cadres and over 45,000 workers, but security experts estimate these numbers are much higher.

These armed Maoist revolutionaries of the Communist Party of India (CPIM), also known as Naxalites, come out of the peasant uprising of June 1967 in sleepy village Naxalbari in West Bengal.

In April, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh admitted that 160 districts across the country are slipping out of government control. He reiterated that the Maoist problem has assumed proportions bigger than the militancy in Kashmir and the insurgency in the northeast.

Therefore, to forcefully wipe out the Maoists from central India, the Chhattisgarh government started a "movement" called Salwa Judum in June 2005. As many as 3,200 tribals, many of them of minor tribes, were recruited as "Special Police Officers" and provided rifles and ammunition by the state. But they had not gone through any military training. The mastermind of Salwa Judum was Mahendra Karma, himself a tribal and the leader of the opposition in the state assembly.

Initially, the government and mainstream media portrayed Salwa Judum as a spontaneous uprising of tribals against the Maoists, hailing it as a turning point in the fight against the Maoist insurgency. At the same time, a few reports indicated that thousands of people had been displaced and were living in miserable conditions in dusty Salwa Judum camps.

Going through such news items, some concerned citizens and a 14-member team of five democratic rights and civil liberties organizations visited the affected areas and, after the investigation, they revealed some astonishing truths in their fact-finding report, "When a State Makes war on its own People," about the ongoing "peace hunt."

In the report, these organizations stated that Salwa Judum is far from the spontaneous uprising of tribals against the Maoists that it is claimed to be. It is an organized, state- managed enterprise. The district collector himself has been a kind of participant of the Salwa Judum meetings, and security forces have been stacking Judum meetings.

"The Salwa Judum has led to the forcible displacement of people throughout the district under police and administrative supervision," the team stated, adding that, according to official estimates, approximately 15,000 people from 420 villages are living as refugees in temporary camps. People have left behind their cattle and most of their household goods. The region is being turned into one large cantonment. In many places regular economic activities have stopped.
"We observed a pattern in the dislocation," the team asserts. "When Salwa Judum meetings are called, people from neighboring villages are asked to be present. Villages that refuse to participate face repeated attacks by the combined forces of Salwa Judum, the district force, and the paramilitary Naga Battalion (paramilitaries in Colombia use chainsaws-ed.). In addition, there are separate raids by the Naga Battalion. These raids result in looting, arson, and killings in many instances. Once in the camps, people have no choice but to support the Salwa Judum. Some of them are forced to work as informers against members of their own and neighboring villages and participate in attacks against them, leading to permanent divisions within villages."

"The heavy presence of the paramilitary forces creates a situation where forces from other states behave like an occupation army. We ourselves saw a number of cattle and people being herded by the paramilitary forces after a raid. In addition, people are being encouraged to carry arms. Chhattisgarh claims to be a tribal state, but culture is being actively destroyed. People, for whom the earth of their village is sacred, are being forcibly removed from it, and the whole social fabric is being torn," the team added.

The entire tribal belt of Bastar has turned into a war zone. Over 250 deaths have been reported since Salwa Judum was initiated last year. There is widespread discontent among the tribals, who feel that the government is using their blood for its own war against the Maoists. The Salwa Judum activists treat all tribals who do not join their camps as Maoists. Unfortunately, the Maoists, too, consider those not with them as being supporters of the Salwa Judum and punish them in their own ways.

Even freedom of speech has not been spared. Kamlesh Paikra, the Bijapur correspondent of a Jagdalpur-based daily, was hounded out of town for writing about the atrocities committed by Salwa Judum. Eventually, he relocated to Dantewada but lost his job.

The recently enacted draconian Chhattisgarh Public Security Act has provided a fertile ground for large-scale human rights violations by the state.
It is believed that tribals are used as ammunition in this war to serve the private interests of a few. Moreover, the second-rung leadership of this campaign is largely in the hands of non-tribals. "It is possible that some of them were lawbreakers and were perhaps now trying to atone for past offenses. Many of them function outside the framework of the law and are thus not accountable to any institution," a cross-section of prominent scholars, artists, retired civil servants, and journalists stated in a separate report after the investigation. They added that "the government must ensure that the killing and looting be stopped immediately and people enabled to return to their villages."

In concluding the fact-finding report, the team demanded that the government stop using people as a shield and creating armed vigilante groups in villages as a part of its anti-Maoist operation. "All killings of civilians and non-combatants by the state as well as by Maoists must be stopped forthwith. Paramilitary forces must be withdrawn from the area, the authority of the civil administration restored, and dialogue with CPIM be initiated. A judicial enquiry should be held into all killings committed by the Salwa Judum/security forces that have gone unrecorded. The camps should be dismantled and the government should assist people in regaining their livelihood in their villages. Both the government and the CPIM must ensure that people return to their homes in peace and security."

The Chhattisgarh government campaign to wipe out the Maoists can be concluded in the words of E.A.S. Sarma (former Secretary, Department of Economic Affairs, Government of India) written in his recent article in a national daily, "The counter-insurgency strategy of the Chhattisgarh Government, with Salwa Judum at its core, has unleashed civil strife in Dantewada. It has already pitted brother against brother and village against village. Unless the tribals are brought to center-stage politically and their well being perceived as the primary requirement, any strategy to deal with the Maoist problem is bound to fail. Violence cannot be the answer to violence. Socio-economic and political issues are at the root of the Maoist problem. They need to be addressed first. Otherwise, Salwa Judum will soon spin out of government control."

http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=c10400&no=303065&rel_no=1