Why is church supporting the UID card?

JOHN DAYAL I live in what is called a Cooperative Housing Society flat in East Delhi, among the fortunate few among the middle classes who could get to own a flat in Delhi thanks to the cooperative movement and a cooperative Delhi government in the late Seventies. Unlike DDA flats, life in such a society, even if one lives on the sixth floor, has a sense of community about it. Residents of all 57 flats in our case, former journalists and media employees from all parts of India, get quite animated about social issues, national crises and above all, on municipal issues much as members of any Residents Welfare Association would do. This week, our RWA and its members had their moment of excitement when a private sector group came to make the government Aadhar cards, or Unique Identification cards. Although I have been writing and campaigning against this UIDAI [Unique Identification Authority of India] scheme for a long time – for reasons which I will explain in a short while – my wife, like me a senior citizen, thought it would be good for us if we too got ourselves a card, in addition to the driving license, the ration card, the Income tax number, the several passports, and multiple Identity papers that we carry. As a loyal wife, she eventually did not go to get herself photographed, her iris measured, her thumb prints taken and her bio data punched in by a man who cannot spell Mary [not my wife’s name]. But she does harbour a feeling that we are going to miss this card at some future date. Patently, I am a bad campaigner where my family is concerned. I was, however, really surprised when a neighbour, a senior journalist, a former member of the Communist Party and a scholar of some reckoning met me in the lift. He was going to get his UID card made. I knew him to be a campaigner against such government floppies. “I am opposed to the UID”, he told me. ”I am getting this card made just in case the government denies us some privileges if we do not have such a card.” An ID card, meant to be a beneficial thing, had quite clearly evolved a tinge of the coercive. My neighbour is an individual and took his own decision, without the prompting of the Communist party or anyone else. But why is the church canvassing for the UIDAI? In my travels across the length and breadth of this country, I have fund Bishops and Parish priests, Pastors and their administrators pumping for the card, without really understanding or being able to explain why they think the cards are important. The only conclusion one reaches is that the Christian leadership has an innate trust in the government of the day, and honestly believes that the government cannot do any wrong. It sides with a few popular movements – such as the middle class angst of Hazare and his team, but of course not the peasantry anger which results in Maoists or the Dalit Panthers of yore. Actually, the UID card is a costly joke, possibly even dangerous in the long run. The United Kingdom has it for a brief period, and expeditiously gave it up when the populace objected to breach of privacy and security of data issues. Inaugurating Aadhar on 29, September 2009 in Tembhli Village in Maharashtra, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called the project the ‘face of modern India’. To Nandan Nilekani, the billionaire co-founder of IT giant Infosys and Chairman of UIDAI with the rank of a Union minister, the project is the foundation for future development of the nation. Almost immediately, critics called it ominous. “The fact that, a project of this magnitude was implemented without even the basic formalities needed and an enabling law is a matter of utmost concern. How can a government approve a sum over Rs. 3000 crores for a dubious project, without a benefit analysis study and the approval of the parliament? The only possible reason behind the undue haste in implementing the project is the business interests involved,” a critic said. “The social, economic, political and ethical impacts of the project are of frightening scale. And well mark the beginning of the end of democracy in India.” Time therefore to bring the Church face to face with the UID reality, because the issues are important, valid and will impact on the church and the community in the long run. Experts, and the Standing Committee of Parliament on Finance, which examined this scheme have said so. Citing “contradictions and ambiguities within the government” over the implementation of the UID, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance rejected the National Identification Authority Bill and asked the government to bring a fresh legislation. The panel also suggested to the government to “reconsider and review the UID scheme”. The committee headed by senior BJP leader Yashwant Sinha said the scheme “is riddled with serious lacunae.” It said the scheme had been “conceptualised with no clarity of purpose” and was “being implemented in a directionless way with a lot of confusion”. The committee pointed out that initially meant for BPL families, the scheme had been extended to all residents of India and certain other persons. The Empowered Group of Ministers set up for collating the UID and National Population Register (NPR) had “failed to take concrete decision on important issues”. These include “(a) identifying the focussed purpose of the resident identity database; (b) methodology of data collection; (c) removing the overlapping between the UID scheme and NPR; (d) conferring of statutory authority to the UIDAI since its inception; (e) structure and functioning of the UIDAI; (f) entrusting data collection and issue of unique identity number and national identification number to a single authority instead of the present UIDAI and its reconciliation with National Registration Authority”, the committee said. It noted the possibility of misuse of information in the huge data base. “It would be difficult to deal with the issues of access and misuse of personal information, surveillance, profiling, linking and matching of data bases and security confidentiality of information” in the absence of a data protection legislation. Sure enough, the scheme soon got its first data misuse. The Press trust of India reported on 3 October 2011 a complaint regarding misuse of address proof, admitted by the authorities in reply to an RTI query. However, it did not give details of the complaint, received this year, and the complainant. Writing in the Hindu on December 16, 2011 analyst R Ramkumar said the government should pay heed to the parliamentary standing committee's views and suspend the Aadhar project. It would be a travesty to push the project in through the backdoor. He explained that the parliamentary committee does not just reject the Bill; it also raises serious questions about the idea of Aadhar itself. In fact, the report so comprehensively questions the idea that any effort to introduce fresh legislation would require, as a prerequisite, a re-look at the foundational principles on which the project was conceived. Ramkumar listed five important arguments in the parliamentary report. First, it contains scathing criticism of the government for beginning Aadhar enrolment without Parliament's approval. Secondly, it questioned about the enrolment process followed for Aadhar numbers which, it said was “riddled with serious lacunae, with no clarity of purpose.” The report concludes that the enrolment process “compromises the security and confidentiality of information of Aadhar number holders,” and has “far reaching consequences for national security.” The reason: “the possibility of possession of Aadhar numbers by illegal residents through false affidavits/introducer system. “Thirdly, the government had not enacted a “national data protection law,” which is a “pre-requisite for any law that deals with large-scale collection of information from individuals and its linkages across separate databases. Fourthly, the report strongly disapproves of “the hasty manner” in which the project was cleared. isting ID documents are also not available.” And last, the report tears apart the faith placed on biometrics to prove the unique identity of individuals. The report concludes that, given the limitations of biometrics, “it is unlikely that the proposed objectives of the UID scheme could be achieved.” Law researcher and civil society activist Dr. Usha Ramanathan, the nation’s top expert on the subject, says the UID project is an experiment – not a solution. She said while recognizing that biometrics is "sensitive information", the agency has washed its hands of responsibility for the safety, security and confidentiality of the data during enrolment and passed the buck to the registrars. In Mumbai women were unable to enroll because of blisters and calluses and the effect of abrasive detergents on their hands. In Bangalore and Delhi that senior citizens were unable to get enrolled because their fingerprints did not work. The credibility roadblocks that these reports were setting up were sought to be removed by the UIDAI by threatening enrollers with "action" if they turned any person away. Questions have arisen about persons with disabilities, some of whom may not have fingerprints or irises that meet the biometric standards required by the UIDAI for enrolment. In Pune, a man received his UID with his wife's photograph appended to it. The US magazine The New Yorker describes how this embarrassment is sought to be averted: a computer operator sits in an office running through enrolment forms to make a cursory judgment whether the image matches the demographic information. "That day," the journalist reports, "he had already inspected more than 5,000 photographs, and he had clicked "incorrect" 300 times: men listed as women, children as adults, photographs with two heads in them." It seems there are infinite variations to the theme of error. In May, "unidentified persons" walked away with two laptops and a pen drive which held data pertaining to 140 persons from an enrolment centre in a school in Hadaspur, Maharashtra. The back-up information was also on the same laptop. The data included "sensitive details" relating to passports, voter ID cards, bank accounts, photographs and a range of other information. In July, five persons were arrested in Bangalore for issuing fake UID. The UIDAI heard about the racket when they were approached with complaints that "Global ID Solutions" was selling franchises to customers to take up Aadhar enrolment for a non-refundable fee of Rs. 2.5 lakh an enrolment kit. This episode exposed the perils of indiscriminate outsourcing. In October, a software error resulted in hundreds of residents of Colaba in south Mumbai having their addresses recorded as Kolaba, Raigarh district. The enrollers claimed that this was a software glitch and that enrolees would just have to return another day to re-enrol. Only, the guidelines of the UIDAI do not have a provision for re-enrolling any resident. Dr. Ramanathan says “This is no innocent data collection in a vacuum. Set amidst NATGRID and UID, it conjures Orwellian images of Big Brother. The relationship between the state and the people is set to change dramatically, and irretrievably, and it appears to be happening without even a discussion about what it means. The National Population Register has been launched countrywide, after an initial foray in the coastal belt. All persons in India aged over 15 years are to be loaded on to a database. This will hold not just their names and the names of their parents, sex, date of birth, place of birth, present and permanent address, marital status – and “if ever married, name of spouse” – but also their biometric identification, which would include a photograph and all eight fingers and two thumbs imprinted on it. This is being spoken of with awe, as the ‘biggest-ever' census exercise in history. 1.2 billion people are to be brought on to this database before the exercise is done. This could well be a marvel without parallel. But what will this exercise really do? Dr. Ramanathan cautions it is wise not to forget that this is not data collection in a vacuum. It is set amidst NATGRID (National Intelligence Grid), the UID and a still-hazy-but-waiting-in-the-wings DNA Bank. Each of these has been given spurs by the Union Home Ministry, with security as the logic for surveillance and tracking by the state and its agencies. The benign promise of targeted welfare services is held out to legitimise this exercise. She says if the Home Ministry were to have its way, NATGRID will enable 11 security and intelligence agencies, including RAW, the IB, the Enforcement Directorate, the National Investigation Agency, the CBI, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and the Narcotics Control Bureau and other secret services, to access consolidated data from 21 categories of databases. These would include railway and air travel, income tax, phone calls, bank account details, credit card transactions, visa and immigration records, property records, and the driving licences of citizens. It is the admitted position that the information gathered in the house-to-house survey, and the biometrics collected during the exercise, will feed into the UID database. The UID document says the information that data base will hold will only serve to identify if the person is who the person says he, or she, is. It will not hold any personal details about anybody. What the document does not say is that it will provide the bridge between the ‘silos' of data that are already in existence, and which the NPR will also bring into being. So with the UID as the key the profile of any person resident in India can be built up. Why is a problem? Dr. Ramanathan answers “Because privacy will be breached. Because it gives room for abuse of the power that the holder of this information acquires. Because the information never goes away, even when life moves on. So if a person is dyslexic some time in life, is a troubled adolescent, has taken psychiatric help at some stage in life, was married but is now divorced and wants to leave that behind in the past, was insolvent till luck and hard work produced different results, donated to a cause that is to be kept private — all of this is an open book, forever, to the agency that has access to the data base. And, there are some like me who would consider it demeaning to have this relationship with the state. For the poor, who often live on the margins of life and legality, it could provide the badge of potential criminality in a polity where ostensible poverty has been considered a sign of dangerousness. (This is not hyperbole; read the beggary laws, and the attitude of some courts reflected in the comment that `giving land for resettlement to an encroacher is like rewarding a pickpocket.')” “Also, the Citizenship Rules cast every ‘individual' and every ‘head of family' in the role of an ‘informant' who may be subjected to penalties if he does not ensure that every person gets on to the NPR, and keeps information about themselves and their ‘dependents' updated. There isn't even an attempt at speaking in the language of democracy!” Dr. Ramanathan points out. Concerned with these issues, eminent persons led by former Kerala Law minister and retired Supreme Court justice VR Krishna Iyer demanded in a joint statement, that the UID project be halted, a feasibility study be done covering all aspects of this issue, experts be tasked with studying its constitutionality, the law on privacy be urgently worked on, a cost- benefit analysis be done and a public, informed debate be conducted before any such major change be brought in. We should await such an exercise before so enthusiastically encouraging innocent parishioners to get their fingerprints and eyes scanned.

A KANDHAMAL UPDATE ON CHRISTMAS EVE

GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CARE JUST HOW MANY WILL SLEEP UNDER THE STARS ON CHRISTMAS IN KANDHAMAL, BUT HAVE WE FORGOTTEN? BY JOHN DAYAL 22 December 2011 This is the fourth Christmas that many people of Kandhamal in Orissa will “celebrate” in terror, a few thousand of them without a real roof over their head, scores of widows and orphans remembering the denial of justice which has seen the killers of the head of the family walk away merrily after being set free by the sop called Fast Track Courts Justice still remains an overwhelming issue for about everyone of the 56,000 people who had to run for their lives first on 24th December 2007 and then again from 24th August 2008. They need not have had to flee if they had obeyed their attackers, changed their faith to Hinduism and burnt a Bible as a token of their leaving Christianity. They did not. Four hundred villages were purged of all Christians, more than 5600 houses and about 295 or so churches burnt, a hundred or more killed -- the exact number will never be known -- some women, including at least one nun raped. The tension remains, exacerbated this season with the murder of a law assistant who was uninvolved in protecting witnesses. In another tribal district, Keonjhar, twelve houses were burnt in a scenario eerily, and frighteningly, similar to the one in 2007 and 2008. Adding to the apprehension is the call by a local group for an agitation, a Bandh, during Christmas week. A few days ago, in Bujlimendi village, Arabbakka gram panchayat, Tikkabali block of G Udayagiri Tehsil, the house of Kaleswar Digal, 45, was sleeping with his family which includes three children, when his house was set on fire just after midnight. The family escaped, but the house, including their animals, were destroyed. There are 25 Christian families in this village of 100 houses, now living in palpable fear. The murder was of Rabindra Parichha, a legal activist who had been working with the Evangelical Fellowship of India for justice in Kandhamal. He was killed on 15th December evening at Bhanjanagar, Ganjam District, which adjoins Kandhamal. A former village chief and a local leader, Rabindra was a popular figure in the region. His family lives in their home in Bhaliapara, in Raikia block of Kandhamal. The police have not been able to say why he was killed. His body bore multiple injuries. Cause of his murder is not known. Rabindra Parichha is the third Christian leader to be killed during this year. Pastor Saul Pradhan of Banjamaha (Raikia) was the first Christian killed during 2011. The police version is that he died of too much liquor and the cold. Pastor Minoketan Nayak of Midiakia (Baliguda) was killed on 26 July. Police say that he died in a bike accident. The police have not acted on reports that Manoj Pradhan, member of the state legislative assembly and prime accused in several cases of murder has been moving from village to village instigating anti-social elements and allegedly urging them to “finish off” all Christian leaders of Kandhamal. The police are also deaf to reports of hate speech. On 23 July, a large rally at Phulbani saw a lot of hate speech, and slogans such as "Hindu-Hindu: bhai-bhai _ Anya sab desh-drohi" [Hindus are brothers. Everyone else is a traitor]. The police was present, but took no action. The "Kui Samaj", a front organisation of the right wing hyper nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party which was once in an alliance in the State government, has called for Kandhamal bandh for five days from 23 to 27 December, throwing the Christians into a state of panic. They have memories of the 2007 violence which also took place in the backdrop of another such strike, or bandh. Bipra Charan Nayak, convener of the Survivors’ Associations of Communal Violence, has demanded that the district and state authorities take note of the latest strike call and act swiftly and sternly. The memorandum, to the government said “We remind you that every year, Kui Samanyaya Samittee in nexus with extreme element of Sangh Parivar gives Bandh Call creating mental trauma among the peace loving Christians of Kandhamal. We demand that such practice be stopped.” The All India Christian Council, one of the several groups working in rehab and justice issues said “Although we are for the freedom of expression and do not wish to curb demonstrations and political activity by any group, even by those who are against Christianity and the Christian people, it is the duty of the government to ensure that there is no excuse for confrontation or violence. In Kandhamal, we have had bitter experience. Out community has been deeply wounded, specially in the aftermath of bundh calls during and around Christmas. We are therefore apprehensive of such bandh calls. The Orissa government and the Kandhamal administration must restrain all mischievous and fundamentalist elements and ensure the Christmas is peaceful.” Not that the region outside Kandhamal is peaceful. On 8th December 2011, a Hindu group attacked 3 tribal Christian families at Chandikhole, a suburb in Jajpur district close to Keonjhar district. When the people went to the police station, they were detained on charges of “conversion” of Hindus. The saddest commentary on the governance in Orissa is in the narrative of the dispensation of justice, specially in the fast track courts where not a single person has so far been convicted of murder – mostly because the witnesses have been coerced into silence and the police has made sure there is precious little forensic evidence from their shoddy investigations The following is the current Status of communal violence cases of 2008-2009 of Kandhamal district. Do remember that more than 3,500 persons filed complaints to the authorities.: 1. CASES REGISTERED BY THE POLICE : 827 2. NO. OF CHARGE SHEETS : 512 3. NO. OF FINAL REPORTS SUBMITTED : 315 4. NO. OF CASES ENDED IN CONVICTION : 68 5. NO. OF PERSONS CONVICTED : 412 6. NO. OF CASES ENDED IN ACQUITTAL : 140 9. NO. OF PERSONS ACQUITTED : 1900 10. NO. OF CASES PENDING TRIAL : 304 11. NO. OF ACCUSED PERSONS ARRESTED : 1607 [Acknowledgments: Fr Ajay Singh, Fr Dibya Parichha, Br Marcose, Pastor Harish Arshaliya, Rev Vijayesh Lal]

Government must bring Bill against Communal and Targetted viiolence

National advocacy and prayer campaign for Communal Violence Prevention Bill JOHN DAYAL Mr Hazare and many of the middle class who have joined him in his national camoaign against corruption do not seem to take the threat of communalism as seriously. No national campaign has yet been launched against the sort of hate violence that leaves hundreds dead every year in various parts of the country, and periodically peaks in the massacre especially of the religious minorities, particularly Muslims, and occasionally Christians and Sikhs. It has therefore fallen, so to speak, on the church in all its denominational diversity to launch a united campaign of advocacy and prayer to urge that Government of India urgently bring before Parliament and pass the Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparation) Bill 2011 after suitable amendments that take care of continuing concerns of minorities, and some concerns of state governments. The Bill, commonly called the CV Prevention Bill, was drafted earlier this year by the National Advisory Council and is now with the Union government. The All India Christian Council , an apex Human Rights and Freedom of Faith forum, and several other groups recently inaugurated the prayer campaign with large meetings of priests, pastors and laity in Bangalore, Mysore, Pune and Panchkula in Haryana. Meetings are planned nationwide. The Catholic Bishops Conference of India, the National Council of Churches, Diocesan Bishops and heads of various church groups and NGOs are also being requested to take the prayer and advocacy campaign to the grassroots in every state. The Bill, with some proposed amendments, has been strongly supported by religious minorities as well as by most members of civil society as an effective means to curb communal violence which has plagued this country after Independence in 1947, and bring justice to the victims. In the last ten years there have been more than 6,000 incidents of communal violence, according to information provided by the government to Parliament. Among the most heinous mass crimes against religious communities in India have been the anti-Sikh violence of 1984 in New Delhi and other cities, the anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat of 2002 and the anti-Christian massacre and mass arson in Kandhamal in Orissa in which 56,000 persons were forced to flee to forests when over 5,600 houses in 400 villages were burnt down by Hindutva mobs. Over 100 persons were killed, Nuns and other women were raped and over 290 churches destroyed. In all cases, the police and officials stood by without acting. Many police and civil officers were guilty of involvement in all these acts of mass violence, and others were guilty of inaction and impunity. In the first week of December 2011 again in Orissa, 12 families of Christians were attacked in a will planned manner in Keonjhar district. In Kashmir, Pundits in a major way and local Christians have also been subject of targeted violence and threats by fundamentalist elements.. All these have been in reported in Indian Currents. Justice, rehabilitation and resettlement in all cases has been tardy. The worst is the issue of justice. Most victims, including of murder, have been denied justice. In Kandhamal, for instance, not a single person has been convicted for murder. The proposed Bill seeks to secure justice for victims and end the climate of impunity by bringing the guilty officials to book. The proposed law maintains that minorities are denied justice because of the communal behaviour of a section of religious and political extremists and the apathy or involvement of the administration. The Bill will also curb hate speech and similar actions. In recent months, VHP leader Dr Praveen Togadia has called for the beheading of missionaries in issues of conversion. Janata party leader Subramaniam Swamy has launched a slander campaign against the Christian and Muslim communities. The Christian groups have denounced conspiracies to scuttle the Bill. The last meeting of the National Integration Council was an example of how the government failed to intervene effectively in support of the bill which, expectedly, came under severe attack from Chief Ministers of BJP Ruled stares as also some allies of the Congress who had issues with the powers of the states on matters of law and order. The government seems reluctant to take immediate steps and discuss the Bill with political parties to end the attempt of Hindutva groups to raise false alarms against the proposed law. Christian leaders in Mumbai had earlier filed a formal complaint demanding legal action against Dr Subramaniam Swamy for spreading hate and violating the Constitution when he wrote an article in a Mumbai newspaper advocating that Muslims should not be given voting rights. Complaints were also filed in New Delhi. Communalism is as evil as corruption. The minority communities have repeatedly called for strong laws to curb hate campaigns and similar activity which leads to the targeting of minorities and marginalised communities, including Muslims, Christians, Dalits and Tribals. It remains to be seen if gthe government will wake up to its duty in this matter. Box item All that you wanted to know about the Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence Bill 2011 The Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011 is intended to enhance State accountability and correct discriminatory exercise of State powers in the context of identity-based violence, and to thus restore equal access to the law for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and religious and linguistic minorities. It is the Constitutional right of every citizen, no matter how numerically weak or disadvantaged, to expect equal protection from an impartial and just State. Evidence from state records and several of Commissions of Enquiry has confirmed institutional bias and prejudicial functioning of the State administration, law enforcement and criminal justice machinery when a non- dominant group in the unit of a State, based either on language or religion, or a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, is attacked because of their identity. This prevents such non-dominant groups from getting full and fair protection of the laws of the land or equal access to justice. The Bill does not give additional powers to the State. This administration already has adequate powers to prevent and control communal violence when it chooses to do so. Communal and targeted violence spreads mainly because the public officials charged with protecting and preventing, either fail to act or act in a biased manner. Existing laws of the land and the machinery of the State are found to work relatively impartially when targeted identity-based offences are committed against dominant groups in a State, but not similarly for non-dominant groups. This Bill will provide correction of institutional bias against groups particularly vulnerable in any State. All citizens, no matter how small their numbers or where they choose to be domiciled, get an equal playing field, in enjoying their full measure of rights as citizens. This is a special provision Bill, for the non-dominant groups, being the linguistic and religious minorities in the unit of the State, and the Dalits and Tribals across the country. KEY PROVISIONS OF THE BILL 1. Defining communal & targeted violence: The provisions of this Bill will apply only when it is first established that the offence was ‘targeted’ in nature i.e. it was knowingly committed against members of a non-dominant group because of their membership of that group, and not for any other reason. Offences under the Indian Penal Code shall be considered offences under this Bill when they meet the definition of ‘targeted’ above. The Bill also specifically defines ‘organized’communal and targeted violence as mass violence that consists of multiple or mass commission of crimes that is widespread or systematic in nature. 2. Dereliction of duty by Public Servants: This Bill recognizes offences of both omission and commission. Often the greatest cause for communal and targeted violence against non-dominant groups occurring, spreading and persisting, is that public officials do not act. Public servants who act or omit to exercise authority vested in them under law and thereby fail to protect or prevent offences, breach of public order, or cause an offence, screen any offender, or fail to act as per law, or act with malafide and prejudice shall be guilty of dereliction of duty with penal consequences. This is the heart of the legislation, for such accountability shall serve as a deterrent to biased action. 3. Breach of Command Responsibility: This Bill seeks to ensure that the power of holding command over the actions of others is indeed upheld as a sacred duty, and that there is culpability for those who are ‘effectively in-charge’. Given the hierarchical nature of administrative systems, the reality is that too often it is those higher up in a chain of administrative or political command that are responsible for failure to perform their duties. Yet, it is only the junior officer on the ground whose dereliction is visible. The tendency for accountability to be fixed only at the most powerless levels of the official hierarchy is being prevented through the offence of breach of command responsibility. The chain of command responsibility may extend to any level where effective decisions to act or not act are taken. 4. Sanction for prosecution of public servants: This Bill proposes that if there is no response to a request for sanction for prosecution within 30 days from the date of the application to the concerned government, sanction to prosecute will be deemed granted. In relation to certain offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, when committed by a public servant, the requirement of obtaining sanction is being dispensed with. This is because these are offences against public justice. Judges shall be the most competent persons to assess the situation and proceed without sanction when satisfied that public justice has been obstructed. 5. Monitoring and Accountability -: This Bill seeks to put in place mechanisms such as a National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice & Reparation and State Authorities that can make the administrative and criminal justice system work as it should, free from favour or bias or malafide intent. Monitoring and grievance redressal shall be the responsibility of the National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation (NACHJR) and corresponding State Authorities for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparations (SACHJR). Their mandate is to ensure that public functionaries act to prevent and control communal & targeted violence and also that public servants ensure victims have access to justice and reparation when violence occurs. The functions of the NACHJR/SACHJR are to watch, advise, remind, recommend and warn of consequences if public servants fail to act as per law. The NACHJR or the SACHJRs do not, in any instance, take over any existing powers of any public official or institution, nor supersede the existing law enforcement machinery. They merely monitor to ensure that the system works impartially. The NACHJR/SACHJRs will thus monitor, inquire into complaints, receive or suo moto seek information, and issue advisories and recommendations only when there is alleged inaction or malafide action by public officials and governments. The monitoring mechanism of the National and State Authorities will also provide the ‘paper trail’ to ensure robust accountability of public officials in a court of law. The NACHJR and the SACHJR shall monitor the implementation of the law and prevention of communal and targeted violence. Almost all modern legislations enacted in the last 5 years like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 and the Right to Education Act, 2009 have built-in provisions for monitoring and grievance redressal. 6. Bi-partisan selection of members of the National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice & Reparation (NACHJR): The Bill proposes a bi-partisan Selection Committee for members (including Chairperson) of the NACHJR consisting of the Prime Minister (Chairperson), Leader of the Opposition in the Lower House, Leader of Opposition in the Upper House, Minister for Home Affairs, and the Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission. 7. Composition of the National Authority for Communal Harmony, Justice and Reparation: The Bill proposes a total of 7 members of the NACHJR, of which 4 shall belong to the non-dominant ‘group’ i.e. 4 members must belong either to a linguistic minority in any State in the Union of India, or to a religious minority in any State in the Union of India, or to SCs or STs. Further, no more than 2 members of the NACHJR may be retired public servants. 8. Offences of communal and targeted violence: The Indian Penal Code (IPC) contains most offences committed during episodes of communal and targeted violence. These have been appended in a Schedule to this Bill, and shall be considered offences under this Bill when they meet the threshold of being ‘knowingly directed against any person by virtue of membership of a group’. These offences shall attract the same penalties as laid down in the IPC. Government is currently considering two other forms of violence for inclusion as offences in our statute books, either in the form of amendment bills or new bills. These include brutal forms of Sexual Assault (beyond the limited IPC definition of Rape in S. 375) and Torture. Both these offences have therefore been included in this Bill. Additionally, this Bill defines an offence of Hate Propaganda, because if hate propaganda can be effectively stopped it will enhance the chances of preventing violence. 9. Victims Rights : This Bill seeks to strengthen the rights of the victim in the criminal justice system, through certain provisions in their struggle for justice – from the simple right to information at all stages, the right to get copies of all their statements, to the right to be heard in a court of law, right to protection, right to appeal, and the right to file a complaint with the NACHJR/SACHJR if and when they are aggrieved by failure of the system to protect and secure for them justice and reparations. These provisions are based on the documented experience of the denial of basic rights to victims of non-dominant groups in a State. Indian criminal law is based on the assumption that the State is always on the side of the victim, against the accused, and therefore primarily the rights of the accused need to be protected. The State investigates, prosecutes, and also adduces evidence and appeals. The victim has limited rights in this process. The reality of targeted violence against non- dominant groups is that a biased State may in these cases, be on the side of accused and actively hostile to the victim. This Bill seeks to correct this bias. 10. Relief and Reparation including Compensation for all affected persons whether or not they belong to a non-dominant ‘group: This Bill recognizes that there are no statutory norms and rights for any Indian citizen under present law, for relief, reparation, and compensation. Thus, all affected persons, whether or not they belong to non-dominant groups in a State have been given justiciable rights to immediate relief, and comprehensive reparations, including compensation if they suffer any harm. The Bill casts legal duties on the State to provide rescue, relief, rehabilitation, compensation and restitution, to ensure that all affected persons are restored to a situation better than which prevailed before they were affected by violence. This is based on the experience that some state governments fail to provide even elementary humanitarian services, by refusing to establish relief camps or forcefully disbanding these prematurely. The Bill also recognizes and protects the rights of Internally Displaced Persons, who are temporarily or permanently dislocated because of targeted violence. 11. Compensation – a national standard for all ‘affected persons’: This Bill requires that when there is violence, and citizens lose their lives, livelihoods, and homes, then each devastation must be recognized in the same manner. Each life lost must be compensated for justly and uniformly. Regrettably this has not been the case, and governments have been both arbitrary and selective in awarding compensation to different groups of citizens with different standards of generosity. Compensation must not be a matter of charity or largesse, but a justiciable right with a single uniform standard for every Indian citizen. This Bill provides that compensation shall be paid within 30 days from the date of the incident, and in accordance with a Schedule, which shall be revised every 3 years. No compensation for death shall be less than Rs. 15 lakhs. No compensation for rape shall be less than Rs. 5 lakhs. 12. The Federal Principle: This Bill takes care not to violate in any way the federal nature of our polity. All powers and duties of investigation, prosecution, and trial remain with the State Governments. WHO ARE THE NON-DOMINANT GROUPS IN ANY STATE? The Bill defines non-dominant ‘groups’ as religious or linguistic minorities in any State in the Union of India, and SCs and STs. Examples of non-dominant groups who have, in recent years, come under attack because of their identity in different States and where the State machinery has acted prejudicially, would include Tamils (as a linguistic minority) in Karnataka, Biharis (as a linguistic minority) in Maharashtra, Sikhs (as a religious minority) in Delhi, Muslims (as a religious minority) in Gujarat, Christians (as a religious minority) in Orissa, and Dalits and Tribals in several places in the country. The salient principle is that each of these non-dominant groups in a State may be vulnerable to institutional bias, and thus need special support to restore equality in the way the law works at the local level. ‘Minority’ which refers to both linguistic groups and religious groups, is a shifting category at the level of the States. Thus Biharis, of all religions, constitute a linguistic minority in Maharashtra or in Assam – where they have been vulnerable to attack based on their regional/linguistic identity, but they are dominant in Bihar. Tamil speakers are similarly a linguistic minority in Karnataka, but not in Tamil Nadu. In several states in the Northeast, in Punjab, in the Union territory of Lakshadweep, and in Jammu & Kashmir, Hindus, belonging to any region, are numerically a religious minority. Constitutional arrangements in this regard require that the State of Jammu & Kashmir may suitably domesticate relevant aspects of this legislation, keeping in mind the unique situation prevailing in that State. IS ANY PARTICULAR GROUP THE PERPETRATOR OF COMMUNAL & TARGETED VIOLENCE? The Bill does not classify or assume any particular group to be the perpetrator of communal & targeted violence. The perpetrator of violence could be any person, belonging to any region, language, caste or religion. The Bill is only concerned with ensuring that when the group under attack is non- dominant in that State, then the officers of the State machinery must not be allowed to let bias to breach their impartiality or colour the performance of their sworn legal duty. THE CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE : There exists a clear mandate to legislate on the issue of prevention and control of communal and targeted violence. Positive and rational legislative measures to correct discriminatory exercise of State power draw their strength from the Constitution of India. Article 14 states that ‘the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India’. Article 21 guarantees right to life and personal liberty, thus State is under duty to protect all its citizens from any kind of violence against them. Article 15 (1) lays down that ‘the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them’. The Constitution thus recognizes that vulnerable groups, defined in Article 15(1), may require protection from discrimination by the State. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are examples in the Indian legal system of special legislative provisions for vulnerable groups in response to social reality and experience. Entry 2A and 97 under List 1 of the seventh schedule empower the Central Government to enact laws for the protection of life and liberty.

Still waiting for justice in Kandhamal

WAITI NG FOR JUSTICE: A REPORT OF THE NATIONAL PEOPLE’S TRIBUNAL ON KANDHAMAL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A National People’s Tribunal (NPT) on Kandhamal was held in New Delhi on 22-24 August 2010, organized by the National Solidarity Forum - a countrywide solidarity platform of concerned persons from various walks of life. The NPT aimed at assisting the victims and survivors of the Kandhamal violence 2008 to seek justice, accountability and peace and to restore the victim-survivors’ right to a dignified life. The twelve-member jury of the NPT was headed by Justice A.P. Shah (retd.). The Tribunal’s final report was released in Bhubaneswar on 2nd December 2011. The report is based on the testimonies of 45 victims, survivors and their representatives. Additionally, it incorporates and draws upon the contents of studies, field surveys, research, fact-finding reports and statements to the Tribunal that were presented by 15 experts. The 197-paged report is divided into four parts. The first part provides the background and context of the violence in Kandhamal in 2008, and highlights the fundamental aspects of the violence. The second part focuses on the impact of the violence. In separate chapters, this part examines aspects such as freedom of religion, the gendered impact of the violence, impact on children, and the impact on socio-economic and cultural rights. The third part compiles and analyzes the responses to the violence. It encompasses role of the state and democratic institutions, processes of justice and accountability and the aspect of reparations. The fourth and concluding part of the report lays down the concluding observations and the recommendations of the jury. Annexures to the report include details of victim-survivors who deposed before the Tribunal, details of reports / statements presented to the Tribunal and details of members of the Organizing Committee for the Tribunal. MAJOR OBSERVATIONS: • Communal Violence in Orissa: The targeted violence against the adivasi and dalit Christian community in Orissa violates the fundamental right to life, liberty and equality guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, and affirmed by the ICCPR, ICESCR, CERD and other international covenants. The brutality of the violence also falls within the definition of ‘torture’ under international law, particularly the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Communal forces have used religious conversions as an issue for political mobilisation and incited horrific forms of violence and discrimination against adivasi and dalit Christians. • Violence in Kandhamal: The 2008 attacks in Kandhamal were widespread, and were executed with substantial planning and preparation. The violence meets all the elements of ‘crimes against humanity’ as defined in applicable international law. Christians who refused to abandon their faith and convert to Hinduism were brutally killed or injured. Burning and destruction of property (residential, official and religious / charitable institutions) was also a predominant form of violence. Human rights defenders have been deliberately targeted for their role in assisting victim-survivors. Moveable property, valuable documents and certificates were looted / destroyed to economically impoverish and lower the socio-economic status of the victim-survivors. Evidence of the attacks was systematically and meticulously destroyed in order to scuttle the processes of justice and accountability. • Gendered Impact: The jury observes, with deep concern, the silence that prevails in matters of sexual assault, at various levels including documenting, reporting, investigating, charging and prosecuting cases. The threats of sexual violence against women and their daughters continue, heightening women’s sense of vulnerability. The attacks on women violate constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination on the ground of sex, and other international standards, including the CEDAW. The relief measures undertaken by the government have been marked by gender blindness and did not address women’s special needs for privacy, nutrition, medical and psychological support. There is no implementation of government schemes by which widows, single women and women survivors of violence can be restored to a life with dignity. • Impact on Children: The impoverishment of the victim-survivor community after the violence has had an adverse impact on the children jeopardizing their physical, psychological and intellectual development. Many children have witnessed horrific violence to their close family members and suffer from acute trauma with no access to services of socio – psycho support and healing. Many children have dropped out of school due to the financial inability of the families to bear the expenses, due to fear or discrimination by the school authority. Children having been forced into the labour force, in hazardous conditions, in order to supplement the family income, and have also been trafficked for the purposes of forced labour, sexual exploitation and abuse. • Impact on Socio-economic and Cultural Rights: The violence against Christians has caused large-scale displacement, leaving the victim-survivors with a sense of rootlessness. The destruction of many churches and prayer halls, and the failure to reconstruct them has deprived the victim-survivors of their right to religious practice. The victim-survivor community is unable to freely practise its faith and is thereby reduced to a state of secondary citizenship – an anathema in a democracy like India with a constitution that guarantees fundamental rights. The violence has had an adverse impact on the livelihood and economic well-being of the affected people. Socio-economic boycott of the Christian community continues to be implemented in a variety of ways. The provisions of NREGA too do not benefit them as it is implemented in manner that discriminates against persons on grounds of religion, caste and gender. • Role of State Administration and Public Officials: The jury members observe, with grave concern, the deliberate dereliction of constitutionally mandated duties by public officials, their connivance with communal forces, participation in and support to the violence and a deliberate scuttling of processes of justice through acts of commission and omission. The state agencies have blatantly failed to extend much-needed institutional support to victim-survivors and protect them from attacks to their persons and properties, ostracism, socio-economic boycott and subjugation by non-state actors. The state government has also failed in its responsibility to prevent the violence in Kandhamal in August 2008. • The Justice Process: The jury observes, with deep concern, that the criminal justice system has been rendered ineffective in protecting victim-survivors and witnesses, providing justice and ensuring accountability for the crimes perpetrated. The complicity of the police and their collusion with the perpetrators during the phase of investigation and prosecution, indicate an institutional bias against the targeted Christian adivasi and dalit community. Victims and witnesses engaged in the justice process have been threatened and intimidated, as there is no guarantee of safe passage to and from the courts. Guidelines on witness protection, issued by the Supreme Court and various High Courts, are not followed by the Fast Track courts. Women and child witnesses face extreme vulnerability. The jury further observes that clear gaps exist in substantive, procedural and evidentiary law to prosecute and punish those responsible for targeted mass violence, and that international jurisprudence in this regard has potential relevance for filling the gaps in Indian criminal law. • Reparations: Through the issuance of a notification prohibiting non-profit organizations from conducting rescue and relief work in Kandhamal, the state government abdicated its constitutionally-mandated duty to protect the lives and human rights of vulnerable populations. The dismal conditions in the government-run relief camps are clearly indicative of the indifference of the State government to the plight of victim-survivors. They are violative of the right of victim-survivors to a life with dignity and equality, as guaranteed by the Indian Constitution; and the right of all IDPs to an adequate standard of living, as recognized UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, 1998. The award of meagre compensation to some victim-survivors and its denial to many, defeat the very purpose of awarding compensation - to repair the harm and loss caused to the victim-survivors. The lack of uniform criteria in damage assessment has led to an arbitrary determination of compensation amounts by State authorities whose acts are coloured by institutional bias against the Christian community. The absence of a comprehensive rehabilitation package has prevented the victim-survivors from being restored to a life of dignity. The negative role of public officials in the peace committees and the infiltration of perpetrators in such committees indicate that the state government’s peace initiatives have been a dismal failure. The jury reiterates that while confidence-building measures are of prime importance, these cannot be undertaken in the absence of or as a substitute for processes of justice and accountability, which are the tool for long-lasting peace in the region. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS: A. Socio-economic and Cultural Rights Apply National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) and other livelihood schemes of the state and central government to the affected community, without any discrimination on the basis of caste, religion or gender. Act against those engaging in such discrimination. Implement widow pension schemes; provide government jobs to individuals from families of deceased victims, on compassionate grounds; reinstate/reappoint victim-survivors engaged in government jobs prior to the violence and transfer them to areas that they perceive to be safe and secure; provide soft loans for commencement of small businesses. Ensure that relief camps meet the minimum international standards of health, hygiene and privacy for IDPs; they should have facilities to meet the educational and nutritional needs of children, lactating mothers and pregnant women; provide medical and psychological, particularly trauma counselling to the victims/ survivors, with a special attention to the needs of women survivors of sexual and gender-based violence. Incorporate a separate section in the State policy on relief and rehabilitation that conforms to Article 3 of the Child Rights Convention, as the guiding principle for all relief and rehabilitation work. Recommend that the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and the National Commission on Scheduled Castes and the National Commission on Scheduled Tribes assess the needs of children, dalits and adivasis respectively from the affected Christian community in Kandhamal, and make recommendations to appropriate agencies at the state and central levels for ensuring their rehabilitation at the earliest. Address educational needs of the children who have suffered displacement as a result of the violence. Address the long-standing problem of landlessness and land alienation of the dalits and adivasis in a comprehensive manner through land reform and redistribution. B. Legal and Judicial Processes Identify unreported cases of sexual and gender-based violence and include the offence of sexual assault in First Information Reports (FIRs), in cases where it has been ignored and ensure that they are effectively investigated and prosecuted. Enquire into the acts of all public officials named in this Report, and pursue stringent disciplinary, administrative and other legal action against them for grave dereliction of duty, and for collusion and complicity in the crimes committed by the perpetrators. Strictly enforce Sections 153 A and B of the Indian Penal Code (promoting enmity between different groups and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) in order to proactively prevent programmes that are divisive, propagate hate and incite violence against religious minorities. Constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to re-examine the already registered FIRs for accuracy, examine registrations of fresh FIRs, the trials that resulted in acquittals due to intimidation and/or lack of evidence and recommend the trials that need be transferred or fresh trials be conducted outside Kandhamal. Appoint Special Public Prosecutors who discharge their duties with professional competence and integrity. At the appellate stage in the Orissa High Court a special panel of lawyers to represent the victims of Kandhamal violence should be constituted. Recommend that State Legal Services Authorities set up a legal cell to assist victims in their legal cases and interactions with the police and courts. Provide protection to victims and witnesses before, during and after the trial process according to the guidelines provided in the judgments of the Delhi and Punjab and Haryana High Courts. Take pro-active measures to prevent threat of sexual and gender-based violence to women survivors and their daughters and pay attention to the needs of the child witnesses involved in various proceedings related to the Kandhamal violence. The State Legal Services Authority lawyers to also ensure, that witnesses depose freely and without fear in the fast Track Courts and to bring any incident of intimidation to the notice of the concerned authorities including the Court. State Legal Service Authority to assist the victim- witnesses to initiate appropriate legal action in this regard. Accord special protection to human rights defenders and adequately compensated the damage to their residential and organizational properties so that there are no impediments to their work in assisting victim-survivors with processes of justice and reparations. C. Reparations Adopt, at the very minimum, the 1984 anti Sikh and 2002 anti Muslim Gujarat compensation package to enhance the compensation already announced. In addition, victims of sexual and gender-based violence should be included as a ground eligible for compensation and employment. Recognize the right of the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) to return home and create enabling conditions to facilitate such safe return in accordance with the UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on Development-based Evictions and Displacement, 2007 and UN Guiding Principles on Internally Displaced Persons. Facilitate the return and reintegration of the affected families back in their villages of habitual residence, or resettle them in safe and secure alternative places of residence that is near to agro-based or other livelihood possibilities. Formulate and implement policies to provide victim-survivors full reparations, which include compensation, restitution, rehabilitation, guarantees that the crimes committed will not be repeated, and forms of satisfaction such as restoration of their dignity and a public acknowledgement of the harm that they have suffered; meeting national and international human rights standards. Include movable properties into the scheme of compensation, and adequately compensate loss of valuables, cash, agricultural produce and cattle, essential documents, household articles and vehicles towards restoring the victim-survivors and their families to the standard of living that they enjoyed prior to the violence. Focus on revival of dignified livelihood options for the affected families, and facilitate a resumption of the livelihood they had pursued prior to the violence. Make a concerted effort at recovery and return of lands that the victim-survivor families had abandoned at the time of the violence, in order that they may pursue agro-based forms of livelihood. Include members of the affected community, particularly women, in all confidence-building and peace-building initiatives by the state and district administration. Substantive participation of women in village level peace committees should be facilitated, rather than a token representation. D. Minority Rights Protect the right to religious freedom and clarify that this freedom means and includes the right to remain animist, areligious and/or atheist, and make any form of forced conversion or reconversion illegal. Formulate a policy / programme to urgently address the issue of institutional bias against the minority Christian community in Kandhamal and other parts of Orissa, through a combination of perspective-building and stringent action that is intended at upholding the rule of law. Review OFRA to ensure that it does not violate the right to religious freedom as guaranteed by the Indian Constitution and international law. Review the definition of the Scheduled Castes in The Presidential Order of 1950, on the basis of the discrimination experienced by members of schedule castes even after conversion. Implement the recommendations of the National Commission for Minorities, issued in their reports of January, April and September 2008 with immediate effect. **********