Does India Qualify for a Permanent Seat in UNSC?
by Mamoona Ali Kazmi
Jan 1 2011
President Obama announced US support for India’s quest for permanent membership of a reformed UN Security Council in the years ahead despite India’s bad human rights record. President Obama’s three days visit to India ended with much disappointment for human rights groups and Indian minorities, as the Nobel Peace prize winner for 2009 did not even talk about the large scale human rights violations in India despite the requests from organizations such as Amnesty International and individual letters to President in this context.
Amnesty international had asked president Obama to raise the issues of human rights violations in Kashmir and Bhopal gas disaster with India. Similarly, an American Vivek Nirala wrote a letter to President Obama informing him about the plight of 260 million Indian Dalits (untouchables) and requesting him to call on the Indian leaders including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his visit to India and ask them why pervasive human rights persist.
India’s dynamic society and political system are juxtaposed by multiple serious human rights concerns. Among the gravest are unlawful killings, excessive use of police force, torture, violence against women, discrimination against Dalits, and persecution of minorities such as Muslims, Sikhs and Christians. In many areas governmental mechanisms fail to protect civil and political rights and do not ensure justice for victims of human rights abuses.
Torture in state detention is widespread in India, involving a range of practices including shackling, beatings and the administration of electric shocks. Disadvantaged and marginalized groups including women, Dalits, Adivasis and suspected members of armed opposition groups are those abused most commonly. According to official reports, 127 people died in police custody in India in 2008-09, although the figure could be higher since several states failed to report such deaths. Torture is also reportedly widespread in prisons. The National Human Rights Commission registered 1,596 complaints of torture of prisoners in 2008-09. The number of deaths due to torture is not routinely reported. The vast majority of cases of torture inflicted on detained people in India are unlawful and punishable under current Indian law, however prosecutions are extremely rare. Law enforcement personnel enjoy virtual immunity from prosecution for torture and other human rights abuses, and prosecutions remain sporadic and rare.
The poor Kashmirs’ in Indian Held Kashmir (IHK) have been suffering all kinds of brutality at the hands of Indian security forces for the last many decades. According to the data compiled by the Research Section of Kashmir Media Service, in the year 2008, the occupation troops during their raids, firing and shelling injured 4,824 persons, destroyed 106 residential houses, arrested 1,408 civilians and molested 93 women. The killing rendered 85 women widowed and 164 children orphaned. Forty four youth were reported missing in custody. Molestation of Kashmiri women by BSF officers and jawans has become a common practice in IHK. India has employed various techniques including black laws to suppress the Kashmiri liberation movement. Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act 1990 (TADA) and Armed Forces Special Powers Act 1990, (AFSPA) are enforced in Kashmir despite the fact that they contravenes the Indian Constitution and international law. These laws violate the basic human rights such as right to life, the right to liberty and security of the person and the right to remedy. The Armed Forces (Jammu & Kashmir) Special Powers enforced on 10 September, 1990 authorized even a non-commissioned officer to search any place, fire at any person (and kill), or arrest on the basis of suspicion. TADA gives security forces and armed forces special powers for unauthorized administrative detention without formal charges or trial for up to one year. Under POTA, any person can be put into prison for not disclosing the information that can prevent an act of terrorism. Apart from Kashmir, Indian security forces are violating human rights on large scale in seven northeastern states. Similarly, the Naxal affected states are also witnessing gross human rights violations.
India’s intolerance towards religious minorities is apparent from its treatment towards Sikhs, Muslims and Christians. Indian government has tried several times to purge Sikh identity and merge them into Hinduism. For this purpose it used all techniques including killing their young generation, destroying their history and distorting their culture. Amnesty International’s report published in 2000 clearly shows that the Indian state continues to pursue its policy of state terror against the Sikhs. Apart from Sikhs, Muslims always remained the victim of Hindu hatred. This hatred led the extremist Hindus to inflict harm to Muslim’s belongings. On 6 December 1992, Hindu extremists demolished 16th century old Babri mosque. More than 2000 people were killed in the ensuing riots following the demolition. Similarly, in 2002 something as horrendous as the Gujarat riots, killing more than 2,500 Muslims, having no parallel in India’s modern history occurred. Christian minorities are also not safe in India. Hindu groups are running an anti Christian campaign for several years. Since August 2008, supporters of the Hindu militant groups Vishwa Hinud Parishad and Bajrang Dal in Orissa have attacked Christians, many of them tribal minorities or Dalits. According to the Roman Catholic Church in India, 300 Christian villages have been destroyed in Orissa, 4,400 houses burnt, 50,000 people made homeless and 59 Christians killed and 18,000 injured.
Indian claims of being a pluralistic society are shattered owing to its discrimination and attitude towards different minorities. Due to its bad Human Rights record, India does not qualify for a permanent seat in Security Council. If India manages to get a permanent seat despite its poor human rights record, it will put a question mark on the credibility, formation and aim of the UN. According to the National Commission of Human Rights of India, more than 62,000 Human Rights violations are recorded annually. Kashmiri Hurriyet leader, Syed Ali Gilani said, “A permanent Security Council seat in the UN for India means a major injustice, which has no moral ground. How will such a country (India) be made a permanent member, when it has not honored the body and rejected its resolutions on Kashmir. Madhu Malhotra, Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific deputy program director said, “If India is serious about its aspiration to be a regional and global power, it needs to address the issue of torture and ensure that the human rights of those it arrests and detains are protected”.
Does India Qualify for a Permanent Seat in UNSC? by Mamoona Ali Kazmi - Instablogs
