Torture in India

By: Amjed Jaaved

Pakistan Today, February 18, 2020

Since 14 October 1997, India has been a signatory to the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel,
Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Yet it has not yet ratified the convention.

India’s Law Commission has observed that India faced problems extraditng criminals from foreign
countries because the Convention prevents extradition to a country where there is danger of torture.
Many financial absconders (Mahul Choksy, Vijay Modi, Nirav Mallya and 36 other absconding
businessmen) pleaded in foreign courts that they should be tried abroad for fear of torture in India.

India’s Law Commission’s had recommended stringent punishment for individuals committing torture.
The draft Prevention of Torture Bill, 2017, was never enacted. It provides for up to 10 years
imprisonment and fine for torture. If torture results in death, the punishment includes death or life
imprisonment in addition to fine. The existing law against torture falls short on several accounts, both
procedurally and substantively, from the U.N. Convention. There is an urgent need for an enactment
based on the UN Convention.

At international forums India has consistently and unequivocally condemned and deprecated custodial
torture and has signed the UN Convention. But the Centre’s reluctance to ratify the Convention stems
from the fact that it envisages comprehensive and standalone legislation, which India presently lacks.
The existing law against torture falls short on several accounts, both procedurally and substantively,
from the Convention and thus there is an urgent need for an all-embracing, standalone enactment based
on it. Articles 51(c) and 253 of the Indian Constitution underscore the “constitutional imperative” of
aligning domestic laws with international law and obligations.

India’s draconian laws, including Section 4 of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1990, as pointed out
in international reports, allows any personnel operating under the law to use lethal force not only in
cases of self-defence but also against any person contravening laws or orders “prohibiting the assembly
of five or more persons”. In India, torture is legal

Victoria Shofield graphically depicts the behaviour of Indian forces in Kashmir in Chapter 15: Hearts and
minds of her 1996 book, Kashmir in the Crossfire. Her observations are still relevant today. A few extracts
are in order.

“…Initially there was tremendous reluctance to acknowledge or publicise any of the alleged excesses,
indiscriminate killing or arbitrary disappearances noted by the human rights groups for fear of
humiliating and hence possibly demoralising the soldiers. …As noted by the Report of the International
Commission of Jurists after their visit in August1993…`The jurists, however, also noted that the
authorities had been ‘tardy in instituting proceedings against governmental personnel who commit
abuses against the people and have created an aura of impunity surrounding officials who violate human
rights.’ In conclusion, they stated: ‘…There is however a long way to go, to overcome indiscipline and
misconduct of the security forces, particularly the BSF, the persistent and regular use of torture in
interrogation and the practice of extra–judicial execution’. (Human Rights in Kashmir, Report of a
Mission, International Commission of Jurists, 1994).
‘Since the insurgency began, torture of the militants and suspected militants had been a feature of Indian
counter-insurgency tactics as a means of extracting information, coercintg confessions and punishment.
According to Amnesty international, ‘the brutality of torture in Jammu and Kashmir defies belief. It has
left people mutilated and disabled for life. The severity of torture meted out by the Indian security forces
in Jammu and Kashmir is the main reason for the appalling number of deaths in custody (Amnesty,
Torture and Deaths in Custody in Jammu and Kashmir, March 1995, p. 2).

The torture generally includes electric shocks, beatings, and the use of a heavy roller on leg muscles,
which can result in extensive muscles damage, leading to acute renal failure. Other forms of inhuman
treatment on various parts of the body, including sexual molestation also have been reported. According
to one victim, quoted by Amnesty,” You always know in advance about the “current” because they send
in the barber to shave you from head to foot. This is supposed to facilitate the flow of electricity. After
he finishes shaving you, he hands you a cup of water to drink and then they attach the electrodes (The
Observer London 13 November 1994, as quoted in Amnesty, Torture and Death in Custody January 1995,
p. 19).Other common methods described by the U.S. Human Rights Agency, Asia Watch, include
suspension by the hands or feet, stretching the legs apart and burning the skin with a clothes iron or
other heated object. Victims have also been kicked and stamped on security forces wearing spiked
boots.’ (Asia Watch, The Human Rights in Kashmir: A Pattern of Impunity’, Rawalpindi, June 1993, p.
58).”

“Sixty-three interrogation centres where torture is routinely carried out are believed to exist in Jammu
and Kashmir, mostly run by the BSF and the CRPF. …In its December 1993 report Amnesty produced
information about the appearance in Kashmir. In its response, the Indian government answered many
of the allegations contained in Amnesty’s report and supplied details on some of those listed as missing…
Another report by Amnesty in January 1995 regarding 705 people who, since 1990, had died in custody
as a result of torture, shooting, or medical neglect, produced yet another rebuttal from the Indian
government. Amnesty however, described their response as `evasive and misleading’. (Analysis of the
Government of India’s Response to Amnesty International’s Report on Torture and Deaths in Custody in
Jammu and Kashmir, March 1995).

Several other reports document torture, custodial killings, and molestation in India. One such report is
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, June 14 “Report on the Situation of Human
Rights in Kashmir: Developments in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir from June 2016 to April 2018,
and General Human Rights Concerns in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit–Baltistan” by the Office of
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Its 49 pages have 388 footnotes,
citing, mostly, Indian records such as official statements in Parliament, while refusing the U.N’s repeated
requests for on-site inspection.

India’s draconian laws, including Section 4 of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1990, as pointed out
in international reports, allows any personnel operating under the law to use lethal force not only in
cases of self-defence but also against any person contravening laws or orders “prohibiting the assembly
of five or more persons”. In India, torture is legal.