INDIA: Human rights activist arrested for writing down judge’s name

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from its local partner, MASUM, a human rights organisation working in West Bengal, India regarding the arrest of one of its activist. It is alleged that Mr. Gopen Sharma, a staff of the MASUM working in Murshidabad district of West Bengal was ordered to be arrested when he was noting down the name of the presiding officer of the 2nd Fast Track Court, Baharampur, Murshidabad, on 12 June 2007.

CASE DETAILS:

Mr. Gopen Chandra Sharma, son of late Mr. Gopal Chandra Sharma is a human rights activist working with MASUM. Gopen is also the District Human Rights Monitor, Murshidabad district, for the National Project on Preventing Torture in India. He is also working for a project managed by the UNDP and the Ministry of Law and Justice.

According to the information received on 12 June 2007 at about 12.30 pm Gopen was noting down the name of the presiding officer of the 2nd Fast Track Court, Baharampur, Murshidabad. The name of the presiding officer was posted on a nameplate. This act caught the attention of the presiding officer. Gopen was summoned by the judge and the officer asked him why he was taking down the name. The presiding officer was not satisfied with the answer provided by Gopen and ordered his arrest.

Upon the order of the judge, the police officers present in the court informed the Beharampore Police Station to take custody of Gopen. When informed about the arrest MASUM contacted the Beharampore Police Station and was informed by the officers that Gopen has been taken into custody by the order of the judge and is with them at the police station. However the police officer refused to provide any further details regarding the reason why Gopen was arrested. The police officer also informed MASUM that Gopen was arrested for an offense under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 of India. Gopen was later released from custody after furnishing a Personal Release Bond.

Section 107 of the Code is as follows: When an Executive Magistrate receives information that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility or to do any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of’ the peace or disturb the public tranquility and is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may in the manner hereinafter provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond [with or without sureties] for keeping the peace for such period, not exceeding one year, as the Magistrate thinks fit.

As evident from this Section the law is to be used for a suspected breach of peace, which as used in Gopen’s case is an example for pure misuse of law and procedure. Additionally, the law in India mandates that a person arrested must be informed the reason for his arrest and served with a memo of arrest. The law also requires that a person related or of the choice of the detainee must also be informed about the arrest and the place where the person will be detained. In Gopen’s case all these legal mandates were violated. It is a crude irony however that in this case it is the court itself that has violated these legal mandates.

Such an act by the court has in fact a more damaging effect upon the system as well as the human rights activists in particular. When there is a breach of procedure by the law enforcement agencies it is upon the court that the ordinary people look up to seeking redress. But as evident from this case in India the courts often breach the law and there is no procedure to take action against the judges who violate the law and procedure. Such attitude of the judicial officers encourages the law enforcement agencies to violate the law.

Gopen is reporting cases of human rights violation, particularly those related to custodial torture from Murshidabad district since the past few years. Due to this Gopen is not appreciated by the law enforcement agencies in that district. For further information please see UA-59-2005, UP-44-2005, UA-161-2005, UA-237-2005, UA-375-2006, UA-045-2007, and UP-025-2007. However, this is the first time Gopen has fallen a victim of the judiciary. While it is not known the exact reason why the court ordered Gopen’s arrest, other than he being questioned by the presiding officer, the AHRC calls for your urgent intervention to ensure that an inquiry is ordered into this case.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please write a letter to the relevant authorities mentioned below, particularly to the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court to ensure that Mr. Gopen Sharma is released from custody. The AHRC is also writing a seperate letter to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers.

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