Font size:

Skeptics may argue that it is an irresponsible generalization to say that Indian police rely on torture to conduct investigations. They may think such incidents are rare. But let us examine the story of a 15-year-old Dalit, or low-caste, boy named Nitish.

Nitish was taken into custody by police officers from Kodungaloor Police Station on Jan. 13. Kodungaloor is a temple town in India’s southern state of Kerala. Nitish was arrested on the temple grounds while watching a festival procession with friends.

An officer took Nitish to the police station, where he was brutally tortured by a probationary police sub-inspector and police constables. The officer wanted Nitish to confess that he was a thief responsible for several unresolved cases that had been registered with the police.

The boy's family soon came to the police station, bringing along a politician for support. The probationary officer summoned Nitish from his cell. The officers had stripped him naked by then and he was bleeding from his wounds. The officer then caned Nitish in front of his parents and the politician.

The boy's mother lost consciousness and collapsed inside the station. Later, the officer released Nitish after “advising” his parents that Nitish required “proper grooming,” which he had demonstrated. Before letting Nitish go, the officer filed false charges against the boy.

When the family approached a superior officer to complain about the incident, the officer said they could not expect the police to buy good food for suspects to get them to confess their crimes.

This attitude is not an isolated view. The speaker of the Kerala Legislative Assembly, K. Radhakrishnan, while inaugurating the 2008 Annual State Conference of police officers, said that police would have to use their “tools” while investigating a crime, for which “third degree” methods were essential. The speaker further clarified his position that human rights were an impediment to criminal investigations, a sentiment shared by police officers and many policy makers in the country.

A few months after Radhakrishnan's public statement supporting torture as an investigation tool, on Feb. 2, India's electronic media aired a short video displaying the shocking brutality practiced by the country's law enforcement agencies. The video showed eight-year-old Komal, a Dalit girl, being publicly tortured in Kailokhar village, Uttar Pradesh. A police officer held Komal up by her hair, twisted her ears and rained blows on her, demanding that she confess to an act of theft.

Five police officers in New Delhi are now facing accusations of raping a woman slum dweller inside the Inderpuri Police Station. The officers brought the woman to the station as they wanted to question her about her husband, a proposition unheard of in Indian law.

What do the police have to say about all this? The most repeated rhetoric is that officers suffer from low salaries and a lack of proper investigation facilities. Political interference and public pressure to prove crimes are also quoted as reasons for pushing the police to torture suspects.

The Supreme Court of India in 2007 tried to address this problem. In a 2006 case, Prakash Singh and Others vs. Union of India and Others, the court directed the government to take measures to delink politicians from the police.

Interestingly, Prakash Singh is a former police officer who believed that the court could end unwarranted political interference in the day-to-day functioning of the police. When the court decided in Singh's favor, the government filed a revision petition seeking a review of the court order on the grounds that the court was interfering with the function of the government.

The revision was not allowed, but the court's directives are yet to be implemented, which demonstrates the simple fact that courts cannot resolve all the issues in the country.

Torture is an important issue because it neither promotes democracy nor supports the rule of law. On the contrary, the open or clandestine use of torture undermines the fundamentals of democratic governance.

India allows law enforcement agencies, particularly the police, to practice torture. As one of the most visible representatives of the state, the police can implement its directives in society through fear. Criminal investigations in India often begin and end with a confession. Fair trials have no place in such an environment.

The tendency to brutally abuse the weak is deep-rooted in the minds of the Indian people. In fact, the subcontinent has been the cradle of this practice. The temporal basis of the superiority of Brahmins, or high-caste elites, forms the foundation of the caste system, which justifies the use of brutal force to suppress weaker sections of society. Ill-conceived notions of divinity, to succeed, require unchallengeable restrictions imposed on those who are expected to remain outside the “divine caucus,” which in the caste hierarchy are those lower than Brahmins.

Brutal suppression was the fate of anyone who attempted to break away from this servitude to the elite. Even in Hindu mythology there is the story of Lord Rama, revered by millions, who kills a low-caste sage named Sambuka to liberate him from worldly sins. Another story tells the tragic fate of Eklavya, a low-caste prince who has to sacrifice his thumb to his teacher Dronacharya to perfect the art of archery – an act forbidden him due to his birth in a lower caste.

Although one of India’s national honors for teachers, the Dronacharya Award, is ironically named after this very teacher, whether he or Lord Rama ever existed is still a highly debatable issue.

Even after gaining independence from the British on Aug. 15, 1947, and forming a democratic socialist republic on Jan. 26, 1950, torture continues to be practiced in India by the powerful on the weak. This undermines the very foundation of the country and is the result of its decayed political system. It reflects the dead Indian mind.

Torture is nothing but state-sponsored brutality. India is neither Burma nor China. There is still space left in the country where open and constructive criticism against evil practices is possible. The question is, are Indians willing to use it? Or are we killing time believing that India is a democracy?

Next: Proposed Bill against torture is eyewash

Torture is a crime against humanity. Is it a crime in your country? Support the international campaign against torture. Please visit: http://notorture.ahrchk.net/.

--

(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. Francis has practiced law for more than a decade and holds an advanced master's degree in human rights law.)