I welcome the statement by NHRCs’ chairperson for protections of Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) about an improved complaints mechanism. According to this statement, here are the highlights from a recent meeting of HRDs:
- Advise police not to summon those HRDs who file complaints of human rights violations of others.
- Set a time frame for the disposal of the complaints of human rights violations of HRDs, especially those related to a threat to their life.
- Complaints of false implication should not be ordinarily disposed of by the Commission treating them as sub-judice.
- NHRC should intervene for expeditious trial of court cases which involve HRDs.
- Post NHRC investigations in a matter, the time is taken in processing to dispose of the case needs to be expedited.
- Conduct a research study to know the causes behind the continued violation of human rights of a particular category.
- Develop a working definition of the human role of the human rights defenders rights, which is easy to understand for all.
- Initiate measures to stop motivated targeting of selected human rights defenders and their organizations through income tax notices.
- Look into the notification for the setting of foreigners’ tribunals and faulty mechanism of appeals against their orders.
- Take a position on the issue of National Register of Citizens and detention centres.
On Thursday, 13th June, the NHRC convened a meeting of its Core Group of NGOs and Human Rights Defenders which was attended by HRDs working across a spectrum of issues.
At the outset, the NHRC acknowledged its own status as an HRD and the value of the work of HRDs in furthering India’s democracy and development agenda. It also affirmed its commitment to protecting HRDs in keeping with India’s international obligations under the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders and the action plan developed at the World Summit of HRDs in 2018.
It is noted that before the NHRC meeting, I issued an open letter with detailed facts and evidences titled “Threat to my life is judged at office desk in NHRC, I am left to live at Perpetrators’ mercy: Lenin Raghuvanshi” on 9 June 2019 and simultaneously I wrote to the President of India, the Home Minister of India and the Chairperson of the NHRC. I faced intimidation, false criminal implication in Varanasi and Delhi due to support to a survivor of domestic violence in Varanasi. I highlighted the summary of non-action and manipulation by NHRC as follows:
1. The NHRC website talked about intervention in false implication. But in case of false implication of a human rights defender, the NHRC resorted to ‘eyewash’ tactics. The NHRC waited to bring cases before courts. They provided a lot of time to CB/CID and police for that reason. I submitted a detailed point-wise protest report of CB/CID and asked for CBI investigation, but smartly the NHRC did not talk about my comments on CB/CID report.
2. The NHRC gave interim direction for the security of Human Rights Defenders and victim on 26.09.2013 and also highlighted a security threat. But the NHRC did not make any effort for compliance of its own direction. It is a sign of a dangerous trend for the protection of Human Rights Defenders.
3. I wrote a letter to Chairperson of NHRC on 26 July 2013 about action against responsible police official under 166 A, IPC. I also demanded the police to file an FIR based on the threat to me on 20th December 2012 and 16 January 2013, but no mention about these demands and facts were evident in the NHRC direction. I also asked for a CBI investigation. But NHRC procedures in my case played a smart, mysterious and silent game in favour of the perpetrators.
4. If you observed all the proceedings then you would find that the NHRC provided a long time to the police department which proves the statement, justice delay is justice denied.
5. I found an important fact that Ms Jyotika Kalra ji assumed office as Member of the National Human Rights Commission on the 5th April 2017 and my case was transferred from Chairperson of the NHRC to Smt. Jyotika Kalra and she provided direction on 15 December 2017 after proceeding on 19.04.2016. She put my case on 20 February 2018. Then she resigned from the NHRC on 2 January 2018 (according to media report) and then she rejoined on 7 March 2018. According to Scroll, among other factors that had compelled her to resign, Kalra mentioned the body’s alleged inefficiency in spreading awareness about human rights, its tendency to close cases quickly. I was shocked to know that she closed my case on 5 November 2018. And she did not mention previous directions of the NHRC. It shows her tendency to close cases quickly and superficially.
I write, “Every time, the Honorable 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 appealed 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. 42218/24/72/2012)”
In this case, we criticised the national and international players through our writing on a blog and email. Now, a few international players are involved, to oppose us to establish the era of ‘corporate fascism’ in the context of ‘sectarian fascism’ of Hindutva.
Simultaneously, Shruti Nagvanshi and Shirin Shabana Khan intervened in the case of the 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.
Mysterious Silence By The NHRC
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. Some associates of PVCHR and I filed many petitions, but the NHRC responded with mere eye-wash tactics. We received surprising responses from the Home Ministry of India and office of Honourable President of India, but there is a mysterious silence by 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.
I say, “After my protest on the technical fault of the visit of UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of Human Rights Defenders, many key players and elites of civil societies initiated a conspiracy, and mysterious silence on my cases and inside campaign on my dignity. I observed many manipulating discussions in important meetings at Kathmandu and Bangkok. I criticise the horrific joint game plan of a few people at NHRC, the police and Civil Societies for falsely implicating me and I ask for a CBI investigation in the matter.”
No comments:
Post a Comment