Saturday, August 29, 2015

Mysterious silence of NHRC in my case: Testimony of Lenin Raghuvanshi.



This matter concerns not only the life and the reputation of a human rights defender, but also the very legitimacy of human rights work in general.




Mysterious silence of NHRC in my case: Testimony of Lenin Raghuvanshi



Since 1993, I am working as a full time Human Rights Defender, for rights of survivors, in India. I live under constant death threats for my human rights work. Threat, intimidation, attack, false implication and defamation are occupational hazards of the process of social transformation towards a plural democracy based on rule of law, non-violence and justice. But, mysterious non-support of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), a premier human rights institution of India, in my cases as a Human Rights Defender, is a real life-time surprise for me.
I am busy in supporting the NHRC to deliver justice for the survivors of Human Rights abuses, since its inception. However, some system in the NHRC is bent on helping malign my image, or delaying the support process, or eye-wash tactics in matters related to my rights as a Human Rights Defender. An urgent appeal of the Asian Human Rights Commission, based in Hong Kong, (The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India fails to provide adequate remedy to a human rights defender in Uttar Pradesh), is a classic example.
Every time, the Honourable High Courts of UP and Delhi have provided me with immediate and effective remedies, in comparison to the Human Rights Defenders desk of the NHRC. I appeal to the NHRC for a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) enquiry into the systematic attack on me and Shruti Nagvanshi, due to People's Vigilance Committee on Human Rights' (PVCHR's) support to a woman survivor and her family. But, there is no step towards any independent investigation by the NHRC, or real time support by Human Rights defenders desk too. There is only one trend, that justice delay is justice denied. (Case No. 4419/24/72/2013, 15443/24/72/2013, 15444/24/72/2013, 22763/24/72/2013, 23165/24/72/2013 & 39430/24/72/2013)
In this case, we criticized the national and international players through our writing on blog and emailing such as this. Now, a few international players are involved, to oppose us to establish the era of 'corporate fascism' in context of 'sectarian fascism' of Hindutva.
Simultaneously, Shruti Nagvanshi and Shirin Shabana Khan intervened in the case of rape of a Danish woman, at Paharganj police station in New Delhi. Both of them are first complaints to the NHRC, but the NHRC did not send a report to them for comment, and marked the case as a closed case'.
Edmund Burke rightly says, "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." So, we are continuously pursuing the case for justice. We received the consequence of false implication by the police of Paharganj Police Station in New Delhi. I, and associates of PVCHR, filed many petitions, but the NHRC responded as mere eye-wash tactics. We received surprised responses from the Home Ministry of India and office of Honourable President of India, but there is a mysterious silence of the NHRC. Why?
India should develop a national law for the protection of human rights defenders, and strengthen the capacity and mandate of the NHRC's focal point on defenders.
The NHRC needs to establish and resource a full-time dedicated focal point, to intervene in cases where human rights defenders are at risk, and to investigate and promote accountability where threats and attacks occur.
This matter concerns not only the life and the reputation of a human rights defender, but also the very legitimacy of human rights work in general.
Few links:

No comments: