Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDIA: Yet another murder of a young man by the Manipur State Police
 

INDIA: Yet another murder of a young man by the Manipur State Police

March 25, 2010

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-035-2010

25 March 2010
------------------------------------------------------
INDIA: Yet another murder of a young man by the Manipur State Police

ISSUES: Extrajudicial execution; arbitrary arrest; murder; impunity

------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information concerning the case of Orsonjit, aged 19 years, who was illegally arrested and reportedly murdered by the Manipur Police Commando Unit. The police officers claimed that he was killed in an encounter and recovered a .32 caliber revolver with two live rounds and one mobile handset.

CASE DETAILS:

On 16 March 2010 at about 8:30am, Orsonjit went to get his scooter repaired. At about 10:20am Orsonjit's mother called him on his mobile phone to return home for lunch. Orsonjit informed his mother that he was in the scooter workshop and could possibly return after the work is over. 

At around 11:30am, one of the local boys informed Orsonjit’s family that a team of police commandos arrested Orsonjit at Mahatma Gandhi Avenue near the OK Hotel, Imphal. On receiving the information, Orsonjit’s family rushed to the Imphal Police Station and enquired about the arrest. The police officer on duty denied any report of arrest but recorded their concern as a complaint. Thereafter, the family members went to Porompat Police Station and then to the Manipur Police Commando Complex at Minuthong. But at all these places the officers informed the family that they had no information about the arrest. In the meanwhile the family tried to contact Orsonjit on his telephone, but their calls went unanswered.

In the evening, the ISTV News, a local cable news network in Manipur, reported, with pictures showing Orsonjit's body, that he had been killed in an encounter with the police. Police officers who appeared in the news claimed that Orsonjit was killed in an armed encounter with the police at Taothong Apheibi, Imphal West. The police also said that they had recovered a .32 caliber revolver with two live rounds and a mobile handset from Orsonjit.

On the next day, Orsonjit's family went to the mortuary at the Regional Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS) at Lamphel and identified his body. The postmortem examination report states that Orsonjit's left hand fingers and his right hand had suffered multiple anti-mortem fractures.
 
On 17 March 2010, members of the local public formed a Joint Action Committee (JAC) to protest the killing. They submitted a memorandum to the Chief Minister of Manipur demanding a judicial inquiry into the incident; the prosecution of the officers involved in the killing based on an impartial investigation; and the video recording of the post mortem examination. Though the Chief Minister accepted the memorandum, the requests were not complied with.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The AHRC has been reporting similar cases from Manipur during the past four years. A short analysis of the situation in Manipur concerning extrajudicial executions is available along with a previous case reported by the AHRC. The information is available here.

Whether Orsonjit was killed in an armed encounter or not is for an independent investigation to decide. From experience and the pattern of extrajudicial executions reported from Manipur, the AHRC strongly suspects that this case too is a fabricated case posed by the state police after having Orsonjit arrested, tortured and shot dead.

It is widely believed that the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA) in force in the state provides statutory impunity to state agencies to engage in human rights violations, including torture, disappearances, murder, rape and extortion. India has thus far ignored concerns and recommendations by United Nations human rights bodies calling for a review of the AFSPA. In 1997 the UN Human Rights Committee said "the continued use of the AFSPA in Manipur was tantamount to using emergency powers". The Committee urged the government to install independent monitoring mechanisms in the state to avoid any misuse of the law by state agents. No such mechanism exists in the state even 12 years after the recommendation was made. Neither was there any follow-up at the UN to ensure that its recommendations are respected by India.

The government of India however constituted a Committee, the Jeevan Reddy Committee, to study the effects of the implementation of AFSPA in the state. The Committee has made its recommendations urging the government to withdraw the law as its implementation has only helped to fuel insurgent activities in the state. But the government has thus far chosen to ignore the recommendations. In addition to the report made by the government appointed Committee, there are similar reports and analysis made by human rights organisations and scholars regarding the issue. One such report is available here.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send letters to the authorities named below expressing your concern in this case. The AHRC is also sending a letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions calling for an intervention in this case.
To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

INDIA: Murder of a young boy by the state authorities

Name of victim: Mr. Khumbongmayum Orsonjit (19 years)
Name of alleged perpetrators: A team of Imphal West District Police Commando
Date of incident: 16 March 2010
Place of incident: Taothong Apheibi, Imphal West

I am writing to voice my concern regarding the murder of Mr. Khumbongmayum Orsonjit. I am informed that Orsonjit was illegally arrested by the officers of Manipur Police Commando Unit near a scooter workshop while repairing his scooter in the morning of 16 March 2010.

I am aware that the family having informed about Orsonjit's arrest immediately inquired with Imphal and Porompat Police Stations and also at the Manipur Police Commando Complex at Minuthong. The police officers informed the family that such an arrest was not made.

I am informed that the family only came to know about Orsonjit's fate when his body was shown in the evening news bulletin of local ISTV channel, Manipur. The police officers claimed that Orsonjit was killed in an encounter at Taothong Apheibi, Imphal West and that they had recovered a .32 revolver with two live rounds and one mobile handset.

I am further informed that the postmortem report mentions that Orsonjit's left hand fingers and right hand were badly fractured which is suspected as a sign of torture.

I therefore request you to conduct a judicial inquiry into the murder of Orsonjit. I request you to make sure that the statements of the witnesses to the incident are recorded and furthermore that the witnesses are provided security. If found guilty, the police officers involved in the murder must be prosecuted.

Yours sincerely,

----------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Dr. P. Chidambaram
Minister, Ministry of Home Affairs
Griha Mantralaya Room
No. 104, North Block Central Secretariat
New Delhi 110001
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 2301 5750, 2309 3750, 2309 2763
E-mail: hm@nic.in 

2. Mr. Okram Ibobi
Chief Minister & Home Minister of Manipur,
Chief Minister's Secretariat, Babupara
Imphal 795001, Manipur
INDIA
Fax: + 91 385 2221817
Email: cmmani@man.nic.in 

3. Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission of India
Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg
New Delhi-110001
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 23340016
E-mail: chairnhrc@nic.in 

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia) 


Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-035-2010
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.