FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 08, 2008
ALRC-STM-004-2008

A Statement by the Asian Legal Resource Centre

INDIA: Initiate good precedents in the Universal Periodic Review

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has started the first session of its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) from yesterday. India is among the 16 states that will be reviewed during this session. The session will end on 18th April. India will be reviewed tomorrow. The review session is held in Geneva.

The UPR is a novel mechanism setup at the UN to review each state party's promise and performance towards the protection, promotion and fulfilment of human rights in its jurisdiction. The UNHRC and the UPR was setup in April 2006 by a resolution (resolution 60/251) adopted by the UN General Assembly. Subsequent to this resolution, the UNHRC adopted a follow-up resolution (resolution 5/1) setting up the modalities for the UPR.

A Working Group is also established at the UN to facilitate the smooth functioning of the UPR process. On 28 February 2008, the UNHRC convened an organisational meeting to select the groups of rapporteurs (troikas) formed to facilitate the review of the states to be considered at the first and second sessions of the UPR Working Group. For the UPR on India, the rapporteurs are Indonesia, Netherlands and Ghana.

Prior to the UPR, the state parties are expected to submit a report to the UNHRC. This report is expected to narrate the true picture concerning the state's commitment for the promotion, protection and fulfilment of human rights in the state. India has filed one such report to the UNHRC. This report is available here. In this report, the government of India has said that it was prepared after a series of consultations with various government departments and also other stake holders like non-governmental organisations and the National and State Human Rights Commissions in India.

The UNHRC also accepts similar reports from other stake holders like the National Human Rights Commission and the non-governmental organisations. The Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) has submitted its report to the UNHRC in November, 2007. This report is available here. The UNHRC later compiles these reports. This compiled report is available here. In addition to these reports the UNHRC itself prepares another report in consultation with the UN mandate holders like the UN Special Rapporteurs. This report is available here.

The report submitted by the Government of India portrays the image that the government would like to project about India to the international community. The report hails the achievements the government has allegedly made in the country in order to promote, protect and fulfil its human rights commitments.

Among other things, the report categorically spells out the government's conviction of bringing developments in the rural sector. The government claims that it believes "…that rural India should be seen as a growth engine and [the government] is determined to channel public investment in the area of rural infrastructure…" The report also lauds about the recent amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code 1973, introducing Section 176 concerning deaths in custody, custodial rape and disappearances. This amendment, the government claims, is not only an important step to prevent custodial violence, but has in fact rendered expected results. The ALRC and its sister organisation the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has documented cases during the past three years that repudiate these claims. The ALRC and the AHRC has documented cases where innocent persons are killed by the Indian Border Security Force stationed along the Indo-Bangladesh border in West Bengal state. Not a single case, according to the ALRC and theAHRC has been investigated by either the state government or the central government.

Similar circumstances exist throughout the country. For example, in the northeastern states of India like Manipur and Assam the number of instances where violence is committed by the paramilitary forces against innocent persons is alarmingly high. So far, neither the Government of India nor the Supreme Court of India has intervened in these cases inspite of repeated calls for help. The paramilitary stationed in the northeastern states of India are replaced by the local police in the rest of the country. Custodial torture is widely practiced in India as a crude tool for investigation.

The ALRC and the AHRC has documented cases that will establish a consistent and widespread pattern of the use of custodial violence by the state agencies throughout India, for which as of now there are no practical remedies. An amendment to the law, though a positive step, alone is not enough to curb custodial violence. What is lacking in India is the will to enforce the law.

An aspect that is absent in the government's report and missed out in the report prepared by the office of the United Nations' High Commissioner on Human Rights is a concern regarding the loss of life and property due to the violence committed by the non-state actors in India. During the past one year alone there has been more than a hundred incidents reported from India where non-state actors were responsible for loss of private and public property in addition to human life. An equally serious issue is corruption. Other than for a passing reference in the government's report while discussing the right to information, there has been no discussion about this issue in any reports that has been prepared in advance to the UPR on India.

It is true that development in the rural communities is important for India's sustainable development. However, the development thus far has been too much focused in creating glossy cities and special economic zones. Starvation and malnutrition is becoming common in India. In most cases the malnutrition and starvation is the direct result of the neglect of the local administration in implementing government programmes. Widespread corruption within the social welfare departments of the government adds additional burden in tackling this issue. While there has been no sensible action initiated in India to address these concerns, the government through policy changes is increasingly limiting the number of persons who could receive the benefits of the government sponsored social welfare schemes.

Quite contrary to the claim in the government report, the government sponsored and aggressive exploitation of natural resources in states like Chhattisgarh not only promotes forced migration of the local populace but also removes the sustainability quotient. Those who protest are falsely implicated in crimes and detained for prolonged periods. Local, regional and international organisations, including the UN agencies have condemned these practices.

The purpose of the UPR is to discuss, analyse and encourage the states to take positive and affirmative steps within their jurisdictions to ensure the promotion, protection and fulfilment of human rights and practices of rule of law. The UNHRC and the UPR were setup with an intention to have such exercises as many numbers of times as possible, thereby shortening the time between each occasion where the human rights situation of a country is discussed and debated at the UN.

The success of this procedure depends much upon the honesty of every party to this exercise. So far India's behaviour at the UN, concerning self analysis or introspection, was that of deceit and arrogance. The history of the UN does not give many other different examples.

As far as ordinary Indians are concerned, these exercises have thus far remained at the exclusive realm of a few diplomats who spend the taxpayers' money in Geneva or New York or as a subject of discussion a few people who represent the non-government organisations at the UN. The average Indian is not aware of what is been discussed in the international forums like the UN, though much of the discussion is about ordinary Indians and the factors that affect their daily life.

The ALRC hopes that the UPR will be a different experience. The ALRC calls upon the government of India and other stake holders, both inside and outside India, to utilise the opportunity generated by the UPR and its follow-up procedures so that this exercise will be beneficial to Indians.

The ALRC expects that India will stop trying to play the regional superpower who wishes to dictate strictures upon its neighbours than correcting itself. Being one among the first 16 states to be reviewed through this new process during this session like the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, India has a duty to set good precedents by positive contributions to this process.

# # #

About the ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.