The killing of five civilians at the hands of Indian army and police in the border district of Kupwara last week came as a grim reminder of 2010, when the Kashmir valley was locked up for more than three months and 120 civilians, mostly youth, fell to the bullets of security forces. The April 12 incident in Handwara led to a cycle of violence, curfews and shutdown that continued for about a week.
Without dismissing it as just another incident in the 26-year-long armed conflict, there is a need to ponder over some harsh realities that the incident points to. The violence has thrown up a major challenge for Mehbooba Mufti, the first woman chief minister to administer what Omar Abdullah had called “the most difficult in state in India”.
The trouble:
Why and how the first bullet was fired in Handwara town on April 12 is known to almost everyone. But the reality beneath the outpouring in the wake of that incident needs to be understood. It all started with a young girl going to a public washroom located close to a bunker manned by the Indian army. Some boys who saw her going inside raised an alarm that an Indian army man had tried to molest her. The town was soon engulfed in rage, which resulted in the death of three civilians – a 21-year-old aspiring cricketer, another youth and a woman. It did not stop there. In the neighboring Kupwara, a youth died after a teargas shell hit him, and an 18-year-old boy was killed by the Indian army in Nutnusa. Every incident in Kashmir has many versions, and this was not an exception.
The local people stood by their version. But a video was released on social media showed the girl narrating what had happened that day. She exonerated the army and blamed the local boys for hounding her. Who recorded the video and who first released it is not known, but the recording seems to have been done in what looks like a room in a police station. But police have denied involvement. The Indian army did something not usually done in such cases. They released the video to the media through their official email address. It was obviously done to neutralize the anger that followed what the locals were saying. But human rights activists and the civil society asked how the Indian army could release the video. The girl and her father were taken into “protective custody” by police.
A magisterial probe has been ordered and the Indian army has also been promised a fair investigation. Even if the video is genuine, the way it went viral and the motives that were made known made it suspicious. It became the victim of the state’s bad track record on human rights and credibility it was facing as an institution. Not only did human rights groups question the video’s genuineness, the girl’s mother too said that she was coerced to give the statement. In this game of claims and counter-claims, the truth may not come out, only several versions of it.
The disconnect:
Why everyone believed in the allegation made by the boys is no rocket science. Despite having been around for like, almost like “permanent residents”, the army personnel are seen as outsiders. The deep sense of alienation on the ground does not welcome them.
On the other hand, Handwara has enthusiastically taken part in elections. More than 70 percent people of the town defied the Hurriyat boycott and voted Sajad Lone to the assembly. Sajad had joined hands with BJP shortly before the elections but that did not deter him from registering a victory in two segments.
According to one theory, the tensions were flared up by vested interests. But political alienation does always play a role on such occasions. Why should the military, that claims to be protecting the people, come under attack like this, and why would a situation arise in which an army officer had to say “the life of ten soldiers was under threat in the bunker”.
The way the Indian army dealt with the situation resulted in the death of three people. Firing was surely the first option they used. There will be inquiries and probes but that will not bring Nayeem, Iqbal and Raja Begum back. The disconnect between people and the state has been discussed in these columns, and no amount of ex-gratia or development will counter that alienation.
The impunity:
Besides the problems faced by police on the ground in avoiding such incidents, it is largely the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) that leads to killings in such situations. In the past, there have been similar horrifying experiences where people were fired at at will. It is mainly because of the impunity with which such killings have taken place that there is no stopping them.
The Indian army has always put its foot down when it comes to questions and concerns about the AFSPA. Both the PDP and the National Conference have been opposing the law publicly, and that opposition became part of the “Agenda of Alliance” agreed on between the two allies in the government. But it is unlikely that anything tangible will be done to do away with it.
On October 21, 2011, when Omar Abdullah had announced that the AFSPA would be partially withdrawn, the Indian army opposed the move tooth and nail. “Time has come for the revocation of laws which were introduced in the state after the onset of militancy, from some areas of the state within next few days. We have already identified the places from which the Act will be withdrawn, but I am not in a position to name those areas,” Omar had said.
On October 21, 2012 he reiterated his commitment at the same venue – the police complex in Zewan. “Situation and circumstances allow revocation of AFSPA from certain pockets of JK,” he had said. “You have areas where there is no operational role of Army as the militancy in the state is at its lowest ebb. There are lesser casualties and therefore the situation is conducive for its revocation. I will pursue further for AFSPA’s revocation and it is worth a mission.”
Omar left office in 2014, but the AFSPA stayed on.
The withdrawal of the law is in the interest of Delhi, because it will help restore confidence and trust. It will also help the Indian army set up an inbuilt mechanism to keep a check on the wrongs committed by its rank and file. And above all, it will fulfill a longtime demand of political parties across the board.
No less than a working group set up by former prime minister Manmohan Singh has recommended its revocation as a major confidence building measure. The group, headed by Mohammad Hamid Ansari (now the vice president), had said it was necessary to do away with the act because it violates fundamental rights of the people.
“Certain laws made operational during the period of militancy (eg the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the Disturbed Area Act) impinge on fundamental rights of citizens and adversely affect the public. They should be reviewed and revoked. Law and order matters should be dealt with, to the maximum extent possible, through normal laws,” read the recommendations by the group.
The high powered Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission, set up in the wake of the strong protests in Manipur, had also recommended scrapping this draconian law. Until that is done, the victims of the violence in Kupwara will not get justice.
The author is a veteran journalist from Srinagar and the editor-in-chief of
The Rising Kashmir
Without dismissing it as just another incident in the 26-year-long armed conflict, there is a need to ponder over some harsh realities that the incident points to. The violence has thrown up a major challenge for Mehbooba Mufti, the first woman chief minister to administer what Omar Abdullah had called “the most difficult in state in India”.
The trouble:
Why and how the first bullet was fired in Handwara town on April 12 is known to almost everyone. But the reality beneath the outpouring in the wake of that incident needs to be understood. It all started with a young girl going to a public washroom located close to a bunker manned by the Indian army. Some boys who saw her going inside raised an alarm that an Indian army man had tried to molest her. The town was soon engulfed in rage, which resulted in the death of three civilians – a 21-year-old aspiring cricketer, another youth and a woman. It did not stop there. In the neighboring Kupwara, a youth died after a teargas shell hit him, and an 18-year-old boy was killed by the Indian army in Nutnusa. Every incident in Kashmir has many versions, and this was not an exception.
The local people stood by their version. But a video was released on social media showed the girl narrating what had happened that day. She exonerated the army and blamed the local boys for hounding her. Who recorded the video and who first released it is not known, but the recording seems to have been done in what looks like a room in a police station. But police have denied involvement. The Indian army did something not usually done in such cases. They released the video to the media through their official email address. It was obviously done to neutralize the anger that followed what the locals were saying. But human rights activists and the civil society asked how the Indian army could release the video. The girl and her father were taken into “protective custody” by police.
A magisterial probe has been ordered and the Indian army has also been promised a fair investigation. Even if the video is genuine, the way it went viral and the motives that were made known made it suspicious. It became the victim of the state’s bad track record on human rights and credibility it was facing as an institution. Not only did human rights groups question the video’s genuineness, the girl’s mother too said that she was coerced to give the statement. In this game of claims and counter-claims, the truth may not come out, only several versions of it.
Indian army soldiers are seen as outsiders
The disconnect:
Why everyone believed in the allegation made by the boys is no rocket science. Despite having been around for like, almost like “permanent residents”, the army personnel are seen as outsiders. The deep sense of alienation on the ground does not welcome them.
On the other hand, Handwara has enthusiastically taken part in elections. More than 70 percent people of the town defied the Hurriyat boycott and voted Sajad Lone to the assembly. Sajad had joined hands with BJP shortly before the elections but that did not deter him from registering a victory in two segments.
According to one theory, the tensions were flared up by vested interests. But political alienation does always play a role on such occasions. Why should the military, that claims to be protecting the people, come under attack like this, and why would a situation arise in which an army officer had to say “the life of ten soldiers was under threat in the bunker”.
The way the Indian army dealt with the situation resulted in the death of three people. Firing was surely the first option they used. There will be inquiries and probes but that will not bring Nayeem, Iqbal and Raja Begum back. The disconnect between people and the state has been discussed in these columns, and no amount of ex-gratia or development will counter that alienation.
The impunity:
Besides the problems faced by police on the ground in avoiding such incidents, it is largely the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) that leads to killings in such situations. In the past, there have been similar horrifying experiences where people were fired at at will. It is mainly because of the impunity with which such killings have taken place that there is no stopping them.
The Indian army has always put its foot down when it comes to questions and concerns about the AFSPA. Both the PDP and the National Conference have been opposing the law publicly, and that opposition became part of the “Agenda of Alliance” agreed on between the two allies in the government. But it is unlikely that anything tangible will be done to do away with it.
On October 21, 2011, when Omar Abdullah had announced that the AFSPA would be partially withdrawn, the Indian army opposed the move tooth and nail. “Time has come for the revocation of laws which were introduced in the state after the onset of militancy, from some areas of the state within next few days. We have already identified the places from which the Act will be withdrawn, but I am not in a position to name those areas,” Omar had said.
On October 21, 2012 he reiterated his commitment at the same venue – the police complex in Zewan. “Situation and circumstances allow revocation of AFSPA from certain pockets of JK,” he had said. “You have areas where there is no operational role of Army as the militancy in the state is at its lowest ebb. There are lesser casualties and therefore the situation is conducive for its revocation. I will pursue further for AFSPA’s revocation and it is worth a mission.”
Omar left office in 2014, but the AFSPA stayed on.
The withdrawal of the law is in the interest of Delhi, because it will help restore confidence and trust. It will also help the Indian army set up an inbuilt mechanism to keep a check on the wrongs committed by its rank and file. And above all, it will fulfill a longtime demand of political parties across the board.
No less than a working group set up by former prime minister Manmohan Singh has recommended its revocation as a major confidence building measure. The group, headed by Mohammad Hamid Ansari (now the vice president), had said it was necessary to do away with the act because it violates fundamental rights of the people.
“Certain laws made operational during the period of militancy (eg the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the Disturbed Area Act) impinge on fundamental rights of citizens and adversely affect the public. They should be reviewed and revoked. Law and order matters should be dealt with, to the maximum extent possible, through normal laws,” read the recommendations by the group.
The high powered Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission, set up in the wake of the strong protests in Manipur, had also recommended scrapping this draconian law. Until that is done, the victims of the violence in Kupwara will not get justice.
The author is a veteran journalist from Srinagar and the editor-in-chief of
The Rising Kashmir