PVCHR on the day of its establishment and international Anti-torture day celebrates as a signature campaign in 50 districts of five states of North India. In Varanasi campaign held in front of Government District Head Quarter in which 76 activists and representative from different organization participates. The District Head Quarter echoes with the chanting slogan for the ratification of UNCAT, enactment of domestic law and to impede police torture
The demands were placed in the banner addressing the Prime Minister of India as
- To formulate police reform on the report of police commission
- Torture bill should be enacted through the discussion among the public.
- Ratification of UN convention against torture (UNCAT), 1997.
- To establish the schemes for social, economic and psychological rehabilitation of survivors of torture and organized violence.
- Post mortem should not be done or related with the schedule caste "Dom community" but by the trained personnel. Because Post Mortem report is important evidence before the court in criminal cases.
- To amend as removal of the section 197 of Cr.P.C. and direct provision of case on the alleged government personnel and officers
Ms. Shruti Nagvanshi, Convener, Savitri Bai Phule Womens' Forum (SWF) states,"this petition is internationally popularize through online petition, Face book, You tubes and blogs, which is supported by hundreds of people together with Asian Human Rights Commission, Government of Netherland along with Mr. Rahul Gandhi. Suppose if10 cases of police torture and maltreatment happens in one police station so, in 12702 police yearly 1524240 cases of maltreatment and police torture happens."
Dr. Lenin Raghuvanshi, Convener, Peoples' Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR) states,"if we gaze the history of police torture in India the Police Act 1861 was established and formation of British colonial police system for not repetition of 1857 revolt and bruise in way suppressive way. If we study the British police system that time British officers holds the post with the power and today the same power high official of Indian police is holding. The British police enforced them to torture Indian citizen and disciplinary action against Indian Police was on their desire. After the many decades of independence no amendment in the colonial Police Act 1861 that result now Indian police is following on the foot step of Britishers and bruising the democratic voice on the direction of anti-poor administration. He said Post mortem should not be done or related with the schedule caste "Dom community" but by the trained personnel, as Post Mortem report is important evidence before the court in criminal cases. Forceful approbation of crime by police under section 161 C.r.P.C. that is not evidence under section 26 of evidence act; if the statement is not given before the magistrate."
As the Prevention of Torture Bill, 2008 being brought by the government of India is a sham. The Bill contains only three operative paragraphs relating to definition of torture, punishment for torture and limitations for cognizance of offences falls.
The Prevention of Torture Bill 2008 falls far short of obligations that the States ratifying the CAT must undertake. It provides "narrow and restrictive definition of torture" with no reference to death as a result of torture. It provides for lenient punishment for torture contrary to the punishments provided under the Indian Penal Code for similar offences. Further, the six months bar for taking cognizance of offences under the proposed Bill is contrary to the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Torture is also used by law enforcement officers as a tool for extortion. This behaviour has distanced law enforcement officers from the ordinary people. In fact, 'law enforcement agency' has become a misnomer in India; public perception sees these agencies as state sponsored criminals in uniform. It is common practice in India for ordinary individuals required to interact with law enforcement agencies to first seek assistance from politicians, to avoid intimidation, abuse or arbitrary detention. Corrupt politicians make use of this as an opportunity to demand bribes. In this way, torture facilitates corruption not only among law enforcement agencies, but also among other public servants.
Similarly, torture corrupts the country's justice delivery mechanisms. Even though torture and fair trial cannot coexist, criminal charges based upon evidence gathered by the use of torture continue to be brought to court, and result in acquittals. On the other hand, when there are possibilities for persons to be convicted through such evidence, fair trial is negated.
As of now there is no law in India criminalising torture. For the past several months, a law to this effect has been under the consideration of the government; however, it would require considerable revision to meet international standards that conceive torture as a crime against humanity. The internationally recognised definition of torture as envisaged in the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment is "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation
The proposed Indian law however, limits the definition of torture as "any act which causes:- (i) grievous hurt to any person; or (ii) danger to life or health (whether mental or physical) of any person". Limitations like the requirement of 'grievous hurt' not only circumscribe the concept of torture from its normative definition, but also put additional burden upon the victim to prove that the injury was grievous in nature. The law is also silent about the burden of proof, which according to existing provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, is upon the victim.
The introduction of the concepts of 'hurt' and 'danger' in the law as qualifiers to the Convention's broad definition of torture can only be viewed as an intentional attempt to dilute the state's responsibility in preventing torture. It is also an attempt to dilute the gravity of torture, the right to be free from which has attained the status of ius cogens, a peremptory norm in customary international law. The condemnation of the crime of torture and its expanding horizon, envisaged as early as 1992 by the United Nations in General Comment 20, is sought to be kept away from Indians through this legislative process.
The law's bypassing of key aspects such as the investigation and prosecution of torture further lessens its use for torture victims. Without exception, no one in India would expect the police to impartially and promptly investigate an act of torture allegedly committed by their peers.
The proposed law also prescribes perimeters to its operation by limiting the time period within which a complaint has to be filed to six months from the date of incident. The law makes no mention of any complaint filing mechanism however, or provisions for witness protection. Considering the gravity of the crime and the possible suspects, a law criminalising torture must include measures for witness protection.
So far, the government has not initiated any discussion or debate concerning the proposed law. Civil society groups however, observe the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, June 26, as an occasion to discuss the brutal practice of torture in the country. For these discussions to be meaningful, civil society must also analyse the proposed law and devise means to make the necessary revisions for it to meet the standards prescribed in the Convention against Torture, which India signed as early as 1997.
In this context the new initiative was taken together by Peoples' Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR), Varanasi and Danish organization Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victim (RCT) for developing testimonial therapy for the police torture and organized violence survivors. 85 survivors of police torture and organized violence were benefited and the psychological conditions of 85 survivors were very worst
Reporting By:Shirin Shabana Khan
Assistant Director (Communication)
PVCHR/JMN
