Font size: 
India was elected to the Human Rights Council initially for one year, which was extended further to 2010 after its re-election in 2007.
On June 12, 2008, the office of a local human rights organization known as MASUM in the state of West Bengal was raided by local police. The police showed up late in the evening and demanded to conduct a search. They said they had a search warrant but refused to divulge any further information about the reason for their action.
MASUM has a good reputation, with several nationally and internationally known human rights activists associated with its daily work. Since its inception MASUM was actively engaged in reporting and intervening in human rights cases, particularly concerning violence committed by law enforcement agencies in West Bengal.
Regional organizations like the Asian Human Rights Commission have reported more than 300 cases in which MASUM was involved in the past four years. Most of these cases exposed atrocities committed by the West Bengal state police and the Border Security Force stationed along the Indo-Bangladesh border.
MASUM's office has often served as a refuge for victims of human rights violations who feared further repercussions from the police for complaining against them. It is also a shelter for victims of political violence who have suffered attacks and assaults from the cadres of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) that has ruled West Bengal for more than three decades.
MASUM is also a network partner of the Tamilnad-based human rights group known as the PWTN in its national campaign against torture. This program was implemented by the PWTN after receiving funding from the European Union, part of which is used to fund MASUM's anti-torture activities.
In the last phase of its national campaign, the PWTN organized public hearings on torture cases documented by its network partners. One such hearing was held by MASUM and the PWTN on June 9 and 10 in West Bengal. About 1,200 victims and their families were present for the hearing at which some 82 victims spoke up. The West Bengal police tried to interrupt the proceedings, which were chaired by well-respected human rights activists and judges. However, the proceedings continued and the hearing was completed.
During their search of MASUM’s office, the police seized documents and audiovisual equipment, which they recorded in a seizure list, as required under Indian law. It was reported that some of the police officers apologized for the trouble they caused the group, but maintained they had to abide by “orders from above.” These off-the-cuff remarks by police officers strengthened MASUM's suspicions about the actual purpose of the search.
The West Bengal state administration has been repeatedly embarrassed by MASUM’s exposure of its law-enforcement agencies in recent years. Each case reported by the group was well documented and exposed a blatant breach of law by the law-enforcement agencies. For example, in UA-279-2006 the facts of the case indicated that a high-ranking police officer had practiced torture and abused his authority even to settle private disputes. The accused senior officer also worked for the intelligence branch of the West Bengal state police.
Another case exposed a police officer who poured acid into the anus of a suspect. In cases like UA-206-2006 MASUM's report exposed the deplorable condition of scientific investigation facilities in West Bengal, like the autopsy facilities. In this case MASUM exposed the gruesome fact that human body parts were eaten away by rats and other rodents in mortuaries under the custody of the West Bengal police.
Other cases exposed atrocities committed by the Indian Border Security Force stationed along the Indo-Bangladesh border and atrocities committed by police officers stationed at the Jalangi Police Station in Murshidabad district of West Bengal. This is known among ordinary people and in international human rights circles as one of the most notorious police stations in South Asia – yet it was declared a model police station by the West Bengal state government this year.
In addition to these cases involving law enforcement agencies, MASUM also reported cases involving ruling CPIM cadres who terrorized residents of Nandigram in West Bengal. For further information please see UP-160-2007.
The above examples show how illuminating MASUM's reports were concerning rule of law in West Bengal.
MASUM is just one among hundreds of human rights groups in India. There is nothing extremely special about what it is doing. Yet for the Indian authorities, organizations like this are an eyesore. They report the “bad picture” of India, instead of the “shining India” picture the Indian authorities are trying to portray internationally.
By authorizing arbitrary and often cowardly acts of retaliation against human rights activists and human rights organizations in India, in fact the administration is creating hurdles against development of the country.
Human rights activists are selflessly bringing to the attention of the authorities the actual state of affairs in even the remotest parts of the country. It is the duty of a responsible administration to listen to the reports of such activists and organizations. There is no reason why the Indian administration should feel annoyed with such groups for doing this important work.
When simple and basic concerns are not listened to at home, people seek help from outside. Human rights work is no exception.
If statements made by the Indian authorities regarding their commitment to human rights values were true, India would be a better place to live by now. But the facts show otherwise, and it is only reasonable to conclude that the Indian authorities are merely trying to create an illusion.
For this contradictory practice, Indians have an excuse – diversity in unity. It is hard to identify unity, though diversity is quite apparent, in promise and performance.
--
(Bijo Francis is a human rights lawyer currently working with the Asian Legal Resource Center in Hong Kong. He is responsible for the South Asia desk at the center. Mr. Francis has practiced law for more than a decade and holds an advanced master's degree in human rights law.)
