UPDATE (India): District Magistrate orders the arrest of a human rights defender for the second time 

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from our local partner, People’s Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR), regarding the illegal arrest, detention and torture of Mr. Santhosh Patel, a staff member of PVCHR, on 7 June 2006. At the time of incident Mr. Santhosh was meeting the District Magistrate Mr. Rajiv Agarwal along with other villagers from Belwa village to lodge complaints of corruption and other discriminatory practices of public officers responsible for Belwa village. Mr. Santhosh was previously arrested and detained under similar circumstances by the order of the same District Magistrate against which the AHRC issued an Urgent Appeal (UA-156-2006). In relation to this incident the AHRC lodged a complaint with the National Human Rights Commission of India [registered as case number 4440/24/2006-2007/UC]. The Commission then directed Senior Superintendent of Police Varanasi to investigate into the case and place the report before the Commission on or before 24 June 2006.

Mr. Santhosh is a human rights activist working for PVCHR in Uttar Pradesh, India and is based in Belwa village. Belwa, a remote village within the Varanasi district faces acute poverty which is due to the exploitation of the lower caste community by the feudal landlords. The AHRC in the past has issued appeals relating to cases from Belwa. Please see UA-138-2005; UP-95-2005; UP-100-2005; UP-166-2005 & UA-068-2006. In regards to the previous incident PVCHR filed a complaint with the National Human Rights Commission of India [petition number 41875/24/2005-2006] on 3 March 2006 alleging that owing to the lack of action by government agencies, the residents of Belwa village are suffering from various problems, of which starvation and acute malnutrition is of particular concern. The complaint was filed by Mr. Santhosh through PVCHR. It was no doubt in response to this earlier incident that the latest attack against Mr. Santhosh took place.

Background information:

Due to the wide publicity of issues such as caste discrimination, exploitation of the poor and acute poverty in Belwa, there were many inquiries with the government agencies expressing concern about the residents from there. There were several inquiries from various agencies of the United Nations and other regional and international human rights groups regarding Belwa. It is also reported that owing to the immense pressure, the state government of Uttar Pradesh recently issued a circular which states that in each case of human rights violation, particularly on hunger and starvation related issues, the victim must be paid a sum of Rs. 1000/- (USD 23) on report of the case and for failure of follow up the Village Secretary, the Block Development Officer and the District Magistrate would be held responsible for dereliction of duty. When problems from Belwa made the daily news, the village suddenly saw a series of visits by many important persons for the first time in their history. One such visitor was Ms. Sayeed Hameed, a member of the Planning Commission.

It was at this time that on receipt of the complaint filed by Mr. Santhosh that the Commission ordered an inquiry. In response, the state administration responded through a directive of the District Magistrate asking the local Tahasildar, Mr. Mohan Ram of Pindara Tahasil (a small division of the district) to visit Belwa and to force the villagers to give statements contrary to the actual situation. The Tahasildar visited Belwa in the first week of May and started forcing residents, of whom a large number are illiterate, to give thumb impressions on pieces of plain paper. Fearing that the district officer would later misuse these blank papers with signatures, Mr. Santhosh intervened and asked Mr. Mohan Ram why he was gathering the thumb impressions from the villagers. He also asked him to release the money according to the government order to the victims. At this point the officer became angry with Mr. Santhosh and soon after left.

Meanwhile the state government also issued 11 ‘Andyodaya cards’ (government permits for receiving rationed articles through the ration shop or co-operative shop) to the villagers. However, when the villagers went to the local co-operative managed by Mr. Ramesh Singh, the shopkeeper failed to provide any rationed articles and said that items such as rice, sugar and kerosene were out of stock. It is alleged that the articles were sold on the black market for a higher price.

It is regarding these matters that Mr. Santhosh, who is physically handicapped and from a lower caste community of Belwa, went to meet the District Magistrate on June 7. On this day the District Magistrate was holding a meeting with local people to hear their complaints. However, at the venue when Mr. Santhosh tried to lodge complaints to the Magistrate about the discriminatory attitude followed by certain teachers at the village school and also about the corruption of some public servants the District Magistrate accused Mr. Santhosh of being a tout and broker who creates nuisances to the district administration. He then ordered Mr. Santhosh be arrested.

Mr. Santhosh was detained at Shivpur police station. Only when Mr. Santhosh was produced before the local Judicial Magistrate, the next day, June 8, did he come to know that a crime was registered against him under Sections 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code of India [a provision to detain persons from committing serious offences] and under Sections 107 and 116 of the Indian Penal Code [provisions for punishing persons from abetment of crime]. PVCHR arranged for a lawyer to appear on behalf of Mr. Santhosh and apply for bail, which was allowed by the Magistrate.

While in custody, at the Shivpur police station, Mr. Santhosh was tortured by the Station House Officer, Mr. N. N. Singh. He was also threatened by the officer who warned him he would be harshly punished if he continued with his human rights work. On the request of Mr. Santhosh, he was examined by a doctor and the medical certificate was produced in court. The case will be again taken up at the Judicial Magistrate Court on June 21 for the second hearing and Mr. Santhosh is to be present before the court on this date.

Other relevant information:

The Executive Magistrates in India are revenue officers enjoying a certain amount of quasi judicial powers. These include, among others, to order the arrest and detention of persons to preserve public order. It is by misusing this authority that the Executive Magistrate ordered the detention of Mr. Santhosh in this case. The Executive Magistrate also enjoys a considerable amount of authority over the police within the officer’s jurisdiction. The Judicial Magistrate on the other hand is a regular court. It is the local police, by law, who are empowered to investigate cases. The circumstances indicate that since the complainant in Mr. Santhosh’s case is an Executive Magistrate the investigation will in no way be impartial. Therefore it is highly unlikely that the allegation of torture, and arbitrary arrest and detention will be investigated impartially by the police and therefore justice will not be served. Furthermore, given the pace of judicial proceedings in India, chances are that the case at the Judicial Magistrate Court will be dragged on for years and Mr. Santhosh will have to report in court, which is far away from his place of work, at least once a month for many years to come. This fact strongly suggests that the case itself has been registered as a pressure tactic against Mr. Santhosh in the hope that he withdraws from engaging in human rights work. The law in India mandates that a criminal case registered against any individual can only be withdrawn if the state chooses so, and subject to the approval of the court trying the case.

The AHRC has in the past raised serious concerns about the failure of justice dispensation mechanisms in India. However, in most cases the perpetrators involved are police officers and other uniformed officers. In this case the situation is such that the Executive Magistrate and the local police have combined their forces to fight against a human rights activist and this in itself warrants serious consideration by anyone who is interested in the promotion and protection of human rights.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send a letter to the relevant authorities seeking for an immediate and effective investigation into the incident and calling for the perpetrators to be prosecuted. The AHRC also calls for a strong stance to be taken against crimes committed by police officers and on investigation and prosecution of such cases. Please write in particular to the District Magistrate Mr. Rajiv Agarwal and the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav.

 

 

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER