Dantewara, one of Chhattisgarh’s 16 districts, is
currently witnessing a civil war-like situation that
may soon spread to neighbouring districts or at least to those districts
under the influence of the Communist Party of India (Maoist). This is due
mainly to a campaign called "Salwa Judum" which proclaims, as its main
objective, to curb "Naxalism". Although described in media and government
reports as a spontaneous people’s uprising and a ‘peace movement’, Salwa
Judum is basically a state sponsored anti-insurgency campaign. A 2006
report on the violation of people’s rights during the Salwa Judum campaign
in Dantewara, Chhattisgarh is aptly defined by its title: When the
State makes War on its Own People. The investigation was conducted by
a 14-member team from five leading human rights organisations: the
People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) units of Chhattisgarh and
Jharkhand, People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR), Association for
the Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR) West Bengal and the Indian
Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL). The conclusions drawn by the
fact-finding team sum up the alarming human rights situation in the state,
where the state machinery, controlled by the BJP, has unleashed its
typical terror on the people of Chhattisgarh.
The fact-finding report brings to the surface three basic
facts about the Salwa Judum campaign:
"First, it is clear that the Salwa Judum is not a
spontaneous people’s movement but a state-organised anti-insurgency
campaign. Second, it is misleading to describe the situation as simply one
where ordinary villagers are caught between the Maoists and the military.
The Maoists have widespread support and as long as people continued to
live in the villages, it was difficult for the government to isolate the
Maoists. Rather than questioning its own performance on basic development,
the government has resorted to clearing villages on a large scale. Tens of
thousands of people are now refugees in temporary roadside camps or living
with relatives with complete disruption of their daily lives. Prospects
for their return are currently dim. Third, the entire operation, instead
of being a ‘peace mission’ as it is claimed, has escalated violence on all
sides. However, only the murders by Maoists are recognised and the Salwa
Judum and paramilitary operate with complete impunity. The rule of law has
completely broken down."
These conclusions were drawn by a fact-finding team that
visited Dantewara from November 28 to December 1, 2005. Since then, many
groups and organisations have visited Dantewara district to study the
ground realities of Salwa Judum. The latest amongst these is the
Independent Citizens’ Initiative which came out with its report entitled
War in the Heart of India in July 2006. The report is based on an
extensive visit by a six-member team to Chhattisgarh from May 17 to 22,
2006. The report categorically concludes:
"After years of trying a military response and failing to
end the threat of armed Maoist insurgency, the Chhattisgarh government has
decided to pit civilians against the Maoists and against each other. We
believe that as a method of combating Maoists the Salwa Judum movement has
been a failure. The state cannot outsource law and order to underage,
untrained and unaccountable civilians. In the year since Salwa Judum
started, civil strife has increased and the administration is on the verge
of collapse. As an elected government which has sworn to uphold the
Constitution, its blatant violation of human rights is completely
unacceptable."
Overcoming the earlier nostalgia about Salwa Judum as an
uprising of Adivasis against the ‘Naxalites’, a section of the media also
began to come to grips with the ground reality in Dantewara, highlighting
the inhuman and undemocratic consequences of the state sponsored military
action.
The official figures of April/May 2006 acknowledged that
45,958 citizens were forced to live in 27 relief camps run by the
government. Unofficial sources estimate that some 70,000 citizens live in
camps or with their families in other districts. These citizens have been
forced to leave their homes and fields and are compelled to live as
"refugees" in their own country. The living conditions in these camps are
inhuman, resulting in malnutrition of children, and young girls are often
subjected to sexual harassment and abuse.
The so-called relief camps also house special police
officers (SPOs) who are pro-government, more often than not from BJP
cadres, appointed with the promise of permanent posts in the police
department. These SPOs include young teenaged youth who are promised Rs
1,500 per month as wages and given military training with guns.
The crimes committed in Chhattisgarh by the Salwa Judum
with the active connivance of police and paramilitary forces go largely
unrecorded and unpunished. These include the killing of civilians, burning
and looting their houses and raping women. According to figures released
to the press by the CPI (Maoist), the Salwa Judum had killed 116 citizens
by March 2006. By November 2005, a total of 91 villages had been attacked
by the Salwa Judum and 1,857 houses had been burnt. Twenty-five women were
gang-raped and six were raped and then killed. Some of these figures
listed by the CPI (Maoist) have been substantiated by the media and by
fact-finding teams from various human rights organisations. Estimates
about the total number of those killed vary from 500 to over a 1,000.
The Dantewara collector provided the PUCL-PUDR
fact-finding team with a list naming 64 civilians who were killed by
Maoists between June and November 2005. According to media reports, 72
police personnel and 30 Maoists died in military attacks on each other
during 2005.
While only an independent and impartial enquiry would
bring out the true magnitude of the violence and crimes committed in
Dantewara district, the involvement of Salwa Judum in committing crimes
with the active connivance of the police and paramilitary forces have been
clearly documented by the fact-finding teams of human rights organisations.
The PUCL-PUDR report also refers to a fact-finding report by the Communist
Party of India (CPI) which visited several villages where they were told
of the Salwa Judum’s looting, burning and killing:
"In village Mundebedi, the CRPF had come accompanied by 50
Salwa Judum members. They took 40 kg of rice from the house of Nandu,
along with chickens, pigs, goats and whatever they could lay their hands
on. The Salwa Judum burnt four of Kavad village’s 36 houses and cooked
within the village some of the things they looted, 20 kg of rice, 20
chickens and one pig. The villagers hid in the forests. While leaving, the
Salwa Judum burnt two quintals of kosra (millet) and 40 kg of rice.
After emerging from Kavad village, the Salwa Judum attacked villages
Pidiya and Andri. Thirty houses were burnt in village Pidiya, and Santu,
son of Aitu, was shot dead by the CRPF. …In village Mallur, a 1,000-strong
Salwa Judum procession came in October along with the CRPF. They beat up
17 youths badly and took them away, forcing them to join the Salwa Judum.
…In Palnar, 30 people were forcibly taken away, of whom Sukhram, son of
Godi, was killed. …Our team also met some villagers from these villages
such as Burji, Pusnar, Palnar and Mallur in Gangaloor camp. Half the
villagers had come to live in the camps while the other half was hiding in
the jungles. Once in the camp, they are unable to do other work or return
to cultivate their fields. They were also expected to turn up for Salwa
Judum processions wherever they were called. In other words, they were
captive."
The conclusions and recommendations of the fact-finding
teams all emphasise the seriousness of the human rights situation in
Chhattisgarh. However, the state continues to repose its faith in military
action. The appointment of so-called supercop, KPS Gill, as advisor to
deal with the growing influence of the CPI (Maoist) in Chhattisgarh only
confirms the suspicion that neither the BJP government in the state nor
the Congress (I)-led UPA at the Centre is inclined to find political
solutions to the civil war-like situation prevalent in the state.
The PUCL-PUDR report points to the grave dangers inherent
in the military solution:
"While ‘development’ is said to be the flip side of the
security approach towards Naxalites, ‘development’ in this area is nothing
more than an appendage of security. Road building in Dantewara, both on
the highway and in interior areas, repairing culverts and small bridges,
etc., is geared towards easy accessibility for security forces into
forest."
The report earlier points to the fact that not only is
Dantewara district the most backward of all 16 districts in Chhattisgarh,
it also tops in illiteracy and lack of health facilities:
"Literacy levels are low in rural areas at 29 per cent for
men and 14 per cent for women with an overall rural literacy rate of 21
per cent. Yet this presents a partial picture. In Bijapur tehsil,
for instance, there are only 52 villages in which more than 25 per cent of
the population is literate and 35 villages have no literates at all. This
is related to the availability and quality of schools in the district: out
of the 1,220 villages, 214 do not have even a primary school and of these,
for 107 villages the school is more than five kilometres away."
With regard to health facilities in Dantewara district,
the report reveals that:
"Out of the 1,220 villages, there are no medical
facilities in 1,161 villages. A primary health centre exists only in 26
villages, a private registered medical practitioner in 17 villages, a
government subsidised one in 12 and a community health worker in 122
villages."
A PUCL-Chhattisgarh team that conducted investigations
into the newspaper reports of hunger deaths in South Bastar during March
2004 found out that 17 tribals had died due to hunger and malnutrition in
Dantewara district alone while 13 had died in Bastar district.
To conclude and reiterate the inherent dangers of a
military solution to the situation, the PUCL-PUDR report says that:
"The administration is undertaking a systematic
militarisation of Dantewara through arming of the village population,
setting up of VDCs (Village Defence Committees), training SPOs and
financing such operations as part of the central government’s anti-Naxal
policy of which the Salwa Judum is an integral part."
The Chhattisgarh black law
Regrettably, the arsenal for state terror has always been
black laws in the name of internal security and public safety. The
Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2005 is one such law.
In its session in December 2005 the Chhattisgarh Vidhan
Sabha passed the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2005 (CSPSA)
when the main opposition party, the Indian National Congress, had staged a
walkout on the Kunkuri rice scam. The Statement of Object and Reasons of
the legislation states that this law is required to be enacted "to keep a
control on organisations and individuals who engage in disruptive
activities and create an atmosphere of terror and fear thereby having an
adverse impact on the security and development of the state." On March 17,
2006 the president gave assent to the bill and on March 21, 2006 the
Chhattisgarh government issued a notification thus making it an Act.
Ø The Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2005
violates the provisions of the Constitution of India and is in utter
disregard of the principles of criminal jurisprudence;
Ø The CSPSA is more dangerous than any previous black laws
such as MISA, NSA, TADA and POTA;
Ø Under the definition of "illegal activities", the Act
brings into its ambit even democratic movements and civil disobedience
movements;
Ø The CSPSA provides for up to two years imprisonment for
persons who though not being members of any unlawful organisation may
nonetheless contribute to its activities, and up to three years
imprisonment for merely being a member of an organisation that is declared
unlawful;
Ø The CSPSA provides for seven years imprisonment for a
person who commits any unlawful activity or abetment to that activity or
tries to commit or plans to commit any such act;
Ø There is no provision for appeal in any court of law.
The Rowlatt Act of 1919 – brought into force by the British colonial
power, with no provisions for lawyers, arguments or appeal – appears to be
the basis for the CSPSA;
Ø The state government can arbitrarily declare any
organisation "unlawful" for a period of one year and it need not
necessarily provide any grounds for such a declaration. Furthermore, the
Act bestows sweeping powers on the district magistrate with respect to
notification of a place being used for the purpose of unlawful activities
and taking occupation thereof, and the seizure of properties;
Ø In fact, the CSPSA is but a repressive tool in the hands
of the ruling class against the people’s movements in Chhattisgarh which
have been resisting attempts by the forces of globalisation to take
control and deny them their right to life and livelihood.
The PUCL-Chhattisgarh organised a National Convention in
Bilaspur on April 15-16, 2006 and later, in Raipur on June 24-25, 2006, to
chalk out a common strategy and agenda to mobilise all democratic and
human rights forces to defeat the draconian designs of the Chhattisgarh
government to repress voices of dissent and democracy in the state. On
June 25, 2006 (remembering the imposition of Emergency rule in India that
very day in 1975), delegates drawn from about 12 states joined in a
peaceful protest demonstration against the Chhattisgarh black law. The
PUCL-Chhattisgarh had also sounded a clarion call to all conscientious
citizens urging them to protest by joining in a signature campaign. Thus,
an appeal to repeal the Chhattisgarh black law with about 10,000
signatures was sent to the chief justice of India. On May Day this year,
several democratic and human rights organisations joined this campaign for
the repeal of the Act.
The PUCL-Chhattisgarh further urged all conscientious
citizens, human rights and democratic organisations to observe August 14,
2006 in "Defence of Democracy".
Anti-constitutional, anti-democratic and anti-people, the
Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2005 is an extremely repressive
law under which any form of democratic protest is declared "unlawful
activity" and any group protesting will be declared "unlawful". The
inclusion of such terms such as "tendency" and "encouragement" in the
definition of the crime only allows the government room to use its
discretion and misuse it to settle scores with political opponents.
The Act denies legal recourse to relief for those
victimised and provides for two to seven years of imprisonment without
proof of intent to commit or definite proof of actual commission of
certain acts. Even journalists and other media persons who publish reports
or interviews about banned organisations can be punished under the black
law.
Enacted while deliberately ignoring the comments and
amendments to TADA and POTA by the Supreme Court, the National Human
Rights Commission and Parliament, the CSPSA is more repressive than any
earlier black laws. Various political parties, people’s organisations,
journalists’ associations and national/international human rights
organisations have been protesting vociferously against the new Act.
The Supreme Court had declared unconstitutional the
section on "intent" in TADA because the law sought to bring criminal
liability upon persons who had no intent to commit such an act. The court
had also expressed concern over thousands of undertrial prisoners arrested
under TADA who were forced to live behind bars without trial or judgement.
The Chhattisgarh government’s draconian designs and
motives are clearly reflected in the fact that it has already banned some
organisations under the CSPSA although the advisory board is yet to be
constituted under the law. The ban on the Adivasi Balak Sangh in
particular gives rise to serious fears that in tribal dominated areas even
children below the age of 18 would be arrested. Indeed the state has
already illegally detained a Class XII girl student as well as an ordinary
electrician in Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh under the CSPSA. They have been
languishing in jail for the past four months without recourse to any legal
remedy. n
