India Uses Public Safety Act for Its Crackdown on Dissent

Khurram Parvez was on his way to Geneva for the UN Human rights council session when he was arrested.

By Cholpon Orozobekova

GENEVA  - On October 19, UN high-level experts called on the Indian government to release Khurram Parvez, a well-known and outspoken human rights defender in India. The statement was signed by Special Rapporteurs, including the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Michel Forst, and the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, Maina Kiai.

“Mr. Parvez`s continued detention following his arrest just a few days before his participation in the UN Human Rights Council, suggests a deliberate attempt to obstruct his legitimate human rights activism,” said the experts.

On September 14, Parvez was on his way to Geneva to attend the 33rd session of the UN Human Rights Council when he was prevented from traveling out of India by airport authorities in Delhi. The UN experts conveyed their concerns to the Government of India, but the official information received so far does not provide clear details on the exact nature of the charges against Parvez, which seem to rely mainly on vague accusations of alleged “anti-India” activities, aimed at disrupting the public order. 

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

Parvez has been charged under the highly controversial Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, which is a law that permits administrative detention without judicial intervention for up to two years. The international community is concerned about allegations that this law has been arbitrarily applied to target human rights defenders.

According to Human Rights Watch, the law contains vague and overly broad terms such as “security of the state” and “public order.” The law also protects officials from legal proceedings for anything “done or intended to be done in good faith,” which is inconsistent with the right to remedy for arbitrary detention or other human rights violations. “The law has often been used to detain people on vague grounds for long periods, ignoring regular criminal justice safeguards,” says HRW.

In early July, protests began in the Kashmir region following the killing by Indian forces of a leader of the armed group Hizbul Mujahideen. The authorities have detained over 400 people. Although the amendment made in 2012 to the Public Safety Act prohibits the detention of anyone under 18, children under 18 have been detained for participation in protests.

“The use of the PSA to detain people, particularly children, violates a range of human rights, and its increasing use in recent weeks undermines the rule of law and further entrenches impunity in Kashmir,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Director. “Police should end the use of the PSA; if people are suspected of committing offenses, they should be properly charged and given fair trials.”

According to Frontline Defenders, human rights defenders in India face a diverse range of attacks and harassment, including killing, torture, ill-treatment, forced disappearance, arbitrary detention, and judicial harassment. Human rights defenders have also been labeled “insurgents and Naxalites (Maoists), in an attempt to discredit their work and justify their targeting” says Frontline Defenders.

There are dozens of human rights defenders and journalists who are still in prison for their work in India. On March 21, Prabhat Singh, a human rights defender and journalist, was detained. He had been investigating false cases brought against tribal villagers in the areas of Chhattisgarh. He also played a key role in highlighting several cases of police brutality and human rights violations in the Dantewada district of India.

According to Frontline Defenders, while Prabhat Singh was in custody he was beaten and sharp objects were used to cut his hands. Police officers also verbally abused and made death threats against him, forcing him to sign several blank pieces of paper.

Recently, the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint program of the World Organization Against Torture Made and FIDH made an urgent appeal regarding the harassment of Kirity Roy, another Indian human rights activist and founder of human rights organization MASUM (Benglar Manabadhikar Surakksha Mancha) and his associates.

The Observatory expressed its deep concern about the ongoing harassment against the human rights defenders, including judicial harassment, arbitrary detention, ill-treatment and threats. They called upon the Indian authorities to put an end to all attempts to intimidate and criminalize members of MASUM and to guarantee the security and physical and psychological integrity of human rights defenders in India.

Lahore Corps beat Australian Army in T20 cricket match

LAHORE -  Lahore Corps cricket team registered four-wicket victory over Australian Army cricket team in an exciting T20 match played here at the Battle Axe Stadium Cantt on Wednesday.

Chasing a target of 131 in the allotted 20 overs, the hosts achieved victory in the 19th over.
Sabir Hussain was top scorer with 29 runs while M Afzal slammed 28, Anwar Khan 18 and Qayyum Nasir unbeaten 17.
Robert Maram was the most successful bowler from Australian Army, who claimed two wickets for 19 runs while Thomas Gilmore and Nicolas Brown got one wicket apiece for 12 and 17 runs respectively.

Earlier batting first, Australia Army team posted 130 runs on the board for the loss of five wickets in the allotted overs.
Mark Brown hammered stylish 39 while Craig Holmes delighted the crowd with his brief innings of 28 studded with three towering sixes and a four and Beau Wright contributed 23.
Awais Zafar, Imran Ali and Nauman Naveed took one wicket each.
M Afzal was declared man of the match.

Former Test cricketers Majid Khan, Salim Altaf, Intikhab Alam and Abdul Qadir witnessed the match at the special invitation.
Renowned cricket commentator Chishty Mujahid and Fakhra-e-Alam amused the crowd with their running commentary.
Whereas, former Test cricketer Amir Sohail contributed with his accurate and polished remarks on the match time line.
Also present were a large number of Army officers along with their families who also enjoyed the match.
Australian International Policy Advisor for Pakistan Simon Tchaikovsk and Defence Attache Col David Bruk were also present there to see players of both the countries’ army men in action.

Later, chief guest Commander Lahore Corps Lt Gen Sadiq Ali thanked Australian Army cricket team for travelling to the historic city of Lahore and hoped that Australian cricket team would also visit Pakistan soon.
He also gave away prizes to the players.

Jammu and Kashmir Government Sacks 12 Officials For Alleged Anti-National Activities

Edited by Veer Arjun Singh

SRINAGAR: The Mehbooba Mufti government in Jammu and Kashmir has sacked 12 officials for their alleged role in fuelling unrest in the state. More than 100 others are being watched closely, and there could be more sackings, sources said.

The dismissal from service of the 12 government employees for "anti-national activities" was ordered on Wednesday evening. Those sacked are mid-level officers from different government departments, including patwaris or land revenue record officials and teachers.

Officials said the government acted on a report prepared by the state police's Crime Investigation Department or CID. Several of those sacked have been charged under the Public Safety Act or PSA, which allows people to be jailed without trial for six months.

More than 90 people have died and over 12,000 have been injured in violent clashes in Kashmir since July 8, when Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist Burhan Wani was killed by security forces. The government has said that the violent protests and stone throwing have been organised and encouraged by insurgents backed by Pakistan.

The action against the government officials comes amid a massive crackdown by the state police in which more than 9,000 people have been arrested for disrupting peace and more than 450 have been detained under the Public Safety Act or PSA, which allows people to be jailed without trial for six months.

This is second time in 26 years of militancy in Kashmir that government officials have been sacked over allegations of anti-national activities in the state.

In 1990, five officials were sacked for their pro-separatist stand, among them Naeem Akhtar who was then a Deputy Commissioner in the Excise Department. Mr Akhtar is currently a top People's Democratic Party or PDP minister in the Mehbooba Mufti government.

That dismissal had led to a three-month-long strike by government employees in Kashmir.

Port development: Chinese delegation visits Gwadar

By Our Correspondent

QUETTA: 

A high-level Chinese delegation arrived in the port city of Gwadar on Wednesday and visited various on-going projects. The delegation visited the Gwadar Expressway, Free Zone, Pak-China Friendship Primary School and some other projects related to the development of the city. Gwadar Port Authority Chairman Dostain Khan Jamaldini and other civil and military officials briefed the Chinese delegation about the pace of work on the projects. The delegation also visited the Gwadar Port where Mr Lee of China Overseas Ports Holding Company received it. The members of the delegation met with Chinese engineers and technical staff working on the port projects.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 19^th, 2016.

UN Day Reminds Pakistan’s Peacekeeping Role

By Sajjad Shaukat

Each year, United Nations Day is celebrated on October 24. On this day in 1945, the United Nations (UN) came into force when the five permanent members of the Security Council ratified its charter This followed a declaration by the UN General Assembly in 1947 which designated 24th of October as United Nations Day, by proclaiming that the day would be instrumental in making people aware of the aims and achievements of the United Nations and to gain their support for its work.

Since its creation, Pakistan has played a significant role as UN member, in bringing peace through active diplomatic, moral and material support in various regions of the world. Therefore, this very day also reminds Pakistan Armed Forces role in UN peacekeeping measures, during war and peace time.

Pakistan Armed Forces are considered the best organized institution, and are highly respected in the country, as since the founding of Pakistan, its military has played a key role in holding the state together, promoting a feeling of nationhood and providing a bastion of selfless service.

Today, Pakistan’s position as one of the largest troop contributing country in the world with one of the highest peacekeepers’ casualty figure is testimony to its commitment and endeavours towards promoting the noble cause of global peace. It is not easy to achieve peace in world’s conflict ridden areas. But Pakistan Army’s history is replete with sacrifices, services to humanity and promoting collective security for human prosperity.

In this regard, Pakistan is a big player in UN peacekeeping forces. Pakistan joined the United Nations on September 30, 1947. Since 1960, it has been actively involved in most of the UN peacekeeping missions. Major contributions of Pakistan Army are in Congo, Liberia Somalia, Ivory Coast, Western Sahara, Sierra Leone, Bosnia, Kosovo, Georgia, East Timor Haiti etc. Even, at present, more than 8200 troops of Pakistan Army are engaged in different peacekeeping missions across various volatile countries.

The performance of Pakistani peacekeepers has been recognized worldwide by several world leaders including those of the UN. An undeniable professional standing of Pakistani forces has made them the passion of every special representative of Secretary General and Force Commander in each of UN peacekeeping operations. In this respect, Pakistan’s dedication towards UN has been acknowledged by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon who himself visited Pakistan and inaugurated the Center for International Peace and Stability (CIPS) on 13 August 2013 and praised Pakistan’s efforts in UN peacekeeping missions.

However, Pakistan has participated in 41 UN missions in 23 states where total 142,542 Pakistani personnel engaged, taking start from UN Congo Operation in 1960. Pak army delivered its services there, and contributed in ordnance, transport and staff. It is still present in Congo, and provided a Battalion Group comprising one infantry battalion and supporting elements.

For maintaining and monitoring ceasefire during transition of West Irian from Dutch rule to Indonesians, Pakistan contributed 1500 infantry troops from October 3, 1962 to April 30, 1963. In a rare acknowledgement of excellent role done, Chinese Premier Chou-En-Lai had said, “The only example in United Nation’s history, when United Nations force had gone in…performed its role honestly and came out, was Pakistan’s military contingent to Indonesia.”

Besides, Pakistan’s contribution was in United Nations Yemen Observer Mission (UNYOM) as a military observer from January to September 1964. Yemen entered into a state of civil war in 1962. To ensure that this conflict did not escalate into global incident, the UN set up its Yemen Observation Mission. And, United Nations Transition Assistance Group in Namibia (UNTAG) was established to assist the special representative of the UN Secretary General to ensure the early independence of Namibia through free and fair elections, and to carry out a number of other duties. For the purpose, 20 military observers from Pak Army performed their duties from April 1, 1989 to March 21, 1990 in Namibia.

Notably, Pak Army played a positive role in the Middle East, and was on forefront for peace restoration. United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observer Mission (UNIKOM) was set up in April 1991, following the forced withdrawal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Its task was to monitor the demilitarized zone along the Iraq-Kuwait border and deter border violations. Pakistani forces which helped continuing their services there from April 1991 to 2003 were assigned the most difficult area in the north of Kuwait city—reclamation of Bubiyan Island was also entrusted to them. The operation was carried out by a task force of Pakistan Army Engineers. The professionalism and dedication displayed by this force was praised at international level.

While, inside the United Nations Transitional Authority on Cambodia (UNTAC), the Pakistan’s military forces carried out peacekeeping operations in the most thorny and remote areas during the period-May 1992 to August 1993. They overcame enormous logistic and operational problems, and proved their courage and determination by defending themselves and those for whom they were sent. Coping with the odds, they handled crisis after crisis and persuaded the warring factions to lay down their arms.

And on the request of the UN in Latin America under the United Nations Mission in Haiti (UNMIH), Pakistan provided one infantry battalion, ‘PAKBAT’ which arrived in Haiti in March 1995 and was deployed in Cape Haitien—the area faced extremely volatile security situation and was also the hotbed of political agitation. ‘PAKBAT’ discharged its duties with an extensive patrolling program, covering various regions there.

Nevertheless, Pakistan’s army has worked in difficult terrains and situations for the global peace. Now, inside the country, although Pakistan Armed Forces are facing a tough situation in wake of war against terrorism, yet they are contributing to global peace and prosperity; having still a large number of their presence in various parts of the world.

Now, the major powers must abandon their false propaganda against Pakistan and its Armed Forces, as the latter did more in response of international demand of world peace.

Nonetheless, in pursuance of Pakistan Army’s unwavering commitment towards international peace, 130 Pakistani soldiers have sacrificed their lives. In this connection, Pakistan Armed Forces’ positive role in the UN peacekeeping measures reflects Pakistan’s desire to see the principles of human dignity, freedom and self-determination.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

Irresponsible nuclear weapon State

Dr Zafar Nawaz Jaspal

THE responsible ruling elite always refrains from warmongering and provoking tactics in a nuclearised strategic environment. Conversely, the reckless leadership approves coercive diplomacy to blackmail or coerce nuclear capable adversary. The former realizes the perilous repercussions of the war between the nuclear weapons states. Whereas; the latter lacks the proficiency to envision lethality of a conflict escalation between the nuclear armed states. Indeed, such a reckless behaviour of ruling elite qualifies its state to be referred as ‘an irresponsible nuclear weapon state’.
Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, New Delhi has been endeavouring to acquire a military potential to blackmail Pakistan. The Indian hawks expressed their desire to conduct surgical strikes or hot pursuit against nuclear-armed Pakistan. This attitude of the Indian hawks manifest that they are convinced about the possibility of a limited conventional war between the nuclear-armed strategic competitors. Moreover, they also believe that they would bleed Pakistan in a limited war with immunity. Indeed, such a belief mirrors the poor understanding of the nuclearized strategic environment as well strategic insanity.
The limited conventional war between the nuclear weapon states is possible with a probability of its escalation into all out war including the nuclear strikes exchanges. The situation becomes more dreadful if the conventional asymmetry exists between the nuclear capable adversaries. And the conventionally weaker state relies on its nuclear weapon capability to deter the aggression of the conventionally superior adversary. In such a situation, certainly, using military force or threat of military force for the pursuit of political objectives is an irresponsible act. Perhaps, the recent claim of premier Modi’s government and Indian Director General Military Operations (DGMO) about the surgical strikes against Pakistan is a reflection of India’s irresponsible behaviour as a nuclear weapon state.
The Indian military establishment and hawkish political leadership’s claim about the surgical strikes in Pakistan proves that India is an irresponsible nuclear weapon state. It necessitates the United States led western world ought to revisit their declaration that India has been qualified to receive a special treatment in the various technologically control cartels/regimes including Nuclear Supplier Group. Since two years, Prime Minister Modi and his fundamentalist Hindu hawks have been provoking Pakistan for escalation of the conflict at Line of Control and working boundary. Perhaps, such provoking acts destabilize nuclear deterrence stability in South Asia.
Prime Minister Modi has openly expressed his strong desire for punitive actions against Pakistan. Many Indian strategic pundits also opined in favour of limited war with Pakistan. Nevertheless, New Delhi has refrained from initiating a limited war or surgical strikes due to the inability of the Indian armed forces. Admittedly, numerically Indian armed forces are in better situation. And conventional military balance is in India’s favour. Despite, having the conventional numerical advantage of India, the belligerent neighbours have strategic equilibrium due to Pakistan’s vibrant battle-hardened armed forces and indigenous nuclear weapon capability. Islamabad already demonstrated its battle field/tactical nuclear weapons potential.
The neutral international strategic analysts have a consensus that India lacks military capability to defeat Pakistan. Moreover, New Delhi’s any kind of military adventurism would be catastrophic for both India and Pakistan in particular and entire region in general. Thus, Indian ruling elite and military establishment’s claim of surgical strikes endangers the entire region’s security. The Indian political leadership and military establishment claim about the surgical strikes against a nuclear-armed adversary destabilizes the strategic stability in the region. It’s because the strategic stability is a product of arms race stability and crisis stability ensuring deterrence stability between belligerent states.
The announcement of the surgical strikes certainly has a potential to amplify the existing crisis or destabilise the crisis stability between India and Pakistan. The crisis instability between belligerent neighbours at least affect two foremost components of strategic stability that includes deterrence stability and crisis stability. The state of strategic stability in South Asia is a cause of concern for the international community. Indeed, war between India and Pakistan would not only ruin these two neighboring states but would also have severe repercussions for the regional and global security and economic prosperity. Therefore, New Delhi’s warmongering rhetoric and increase of fire across the line of control are not in interest of international community.
Ironically, despite India’s irresponsible behaviour, the United States and its like-minded states have been lobbying for India’s entry into the nuclear supplier group. This generates an impression that either they are underestimating the gravity of the situation between India and Pakistan, or they are more interested in their strategic interest to build India to check China. These western powers, however, are failing to realise that supporting an irresponsible nuclear weapon state at the international forums for sake of strategic advantageous would be catastrophic for international security.
The Indian militarist ruling elite and military establishment have been endeavouring to fool their own people, misguide the international community, and terrorise the people of Pakistan. Maybe they are successful in fooling a section of the Indian society and a few unthinking herds in the international community, but they have been miserably failed in intimidating the people of Pakistan. Indeed, such a behaviour of the Indian ruling elite and military establishment verifies the nuclear Armageddon scenario professed by the nuclear pessimists. To conclude, the warmongering behaviour of the Indian ruling elite and claim of the Indian DGMO about surgical strikes qualify India as an irresponsible nuclear weapon state. Hence, its imperative that international community should seriously check India’s reckless behaviour that is perilous for the regional security.
— The writer is Associate Professor, School of Politics and International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

India’s sound and fury

MUNIR AKRAM

IN the current crisis, it is tempting to dismiss India’s dire threats, outlandish propaganda, childish antics and illusory ‘surgical strikes’, in Shakespeare’s words, as “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”. The clamour from India is certainly replete with idiocy and delusional nonsense. Yet, India’s aggressive posture and propaganda may signify a more ominous portent.

It is clear that India has been encouraged by its new alliance with the US to conclude that it can suppress the latest revolt in India-held Jammu and Kashmir with brutal impunity. America and other Western powers are not prepared to speak out against India’s massive violations of human rights in Kashmir.

The fictional ‘surgical strikes’ across the LoC have led some Indian analysts to assert that New Delhi has established a new threshold for military action against Pakistan without evoking retaliation. Do the Modi government and Indian military leaders actually endorse this thesis? Was India prevented from carrying out cross-LoC strikes because of its own assessment that Pakistan would retaliate, or because of the cautionary advice of the US and other powers? If this is not clear, Pakistan will need to evaluate what it needs to do to re-establish the mutual deterrence inducted after the 1998 nuclear tests.

---

Pakistan’s policymakers must restore focus on the real challenge posed by India’s hostility.

---

The high-level meeting convened in Islamabad to review the current crisis with India should have focused on such strategic issues and the challenge of defending the hapless Kashmiris. Instead, if the report in this newspaper is correct, it appears that the meeting focused on India’s thesis that Pakistan will be ‘isolated’ because of its incomplete action against ‘terrorist’ groups. Apart from the legal and political complexity of the issue, action on this issue at this time would be interpreted as capitulation to Indian military pressure and threats and, that too, while India openly supports insurrection in Balochistan and sponsors the TTP from Afghan territory. To confound confusion, the sensitive internal deliberations were ‘leaked’ to the press.

Pakistan’s policymakers must restore focus on the real challenge posed by India’s hostility and its oppression in occupied Jammu and Kashmir. The prime minister made a bold speech at the UN General Assembly, proposing an investigation of India’s human rights violations in occupied Kashmir; Pakistan-India arms control and military restraint; and consultations with the Security Council to demilitarise Kashmir and implement the Security Council resolutions.

These proposals must be actively promoted by Pakistan’s diplomacy in the Security Council, the Human Rights Council and other relevant forums. The major powers should be apprised of the ground realities. The 20 political envoys dispatched by the prime minister, with some exceptions, are unlikely to be equal to this task. There are at least a dozen experienced and respected diplomats available in Islamabad who could be used for this purpose.

There are three essential messages that need to be conveyed to the international community.

One: Kashmir remains a nuclear flashpoint. India has been unable to extinguish the Kashmiri demand for self-determination in 70 years; it will be unable to do so in the foreseeable future. Every generation of Kashmiris will keep rising against Indian rule. Indian violence will be met by Kashmiri retaliation. India will always blame Pakistan for this. A Pakistan-India war will remain an ever-present threat.

Two: India is obviously being encouraged in its brutality and belligerence by its new-found alliance with the US. New Delhi may convince itself that it is in a position to engage in a limited or punitive war against Pakistan. This would be a catastrophic mistake. Pakistan and India need to adopt measures for mutual restraint to avoid any conflict, now or in the future.

Three: since bilateral efforts have failed for 70 years, it is essential that the international community intercedes forcefully to promote a peaceful solution to the Kashmir dispute and prevent a war between Pakistan and India, by design or accident.

Our leaders and people should be clear: Pakistan is not isolated, nor likely to be. In fact, there are several current opportunities for Pakistan’s diplomacy to shift the strategic balance in its favour.

First, Pakistan should open an early dialogue with the incoming US administration to underline the need for a balanced US policy to prevent an Indian threat to Pakistan’s security and to sustain Pakistan-US cooperation on Afghanistan, counterterrorism, non-proliferation as well as trade and investment.

Second, while US support for India’s military build-up is aimed against China, it is Pakistan which faces the primary threat from this build-up. As Pakistan’s strategic partner, China must be asked at the highest level to intensify its strategic cooperation with Pakistan and enable it to effectively counter the advanced military capabilities India is deploying against Pakistan.

Third, Islamabad needs to take full advantage of Russia’s new openness to a strategic relationship with Pakistan and build a relationship covering defence, technology, energy, Afghanistan and countering terrorism.

Fourth, Pakistan and Iran have a common interest in stabilising their Baloch provinces. This can be the foundation for a restored strategic relationship encompassing trade, energy, defence and Afghanistan.

Fifth, Saudi Arabia is strategically adrift due to the erosion of its alliance with the US. Pakistan can extend support to the House of Saud without becoming involved in the competition between Riyadh and Tehran.

Sixth, Turkey’s ties with the US and Nato are also frayed. Pakistan’s already close relationship with Ankara can be expanded across the board.

Last, while the threat from India is existential, it is potential. The hostile intervention from Afghanistan by the TTP and BLA is operational. In the absence of Kabul’s cooperation, ‘surgical strikes’ against TTP safe havens and BLA safe houses should be an active option for Pakistan. Moreover, if Ghani’s government continues to refuse a negotiated peace, Pakistan is well placed to promote an alternative peace process involving those Afghans who are ready to reach a peace settlement based on power-sharing and the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan.

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.