Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDIA: A man's life is at risk and his fate is unknown after his illegal arrest by the army in Manipur
 

INDIA: A man's life is at risk and his fate is unknown after his illegal arrest by the army in Manipur

August 6, 2010

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-116-2010



6 August 2010
------------------------------------------------------
INDIA: A man's life is at risk and his fate is unknown after his illegal arrest by the army in Manipur

ISSUES: Illegal arrest and detention; enforced disappearances; militarization
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received detailed information regarding the illegal arrest and abduction of a man by army personnel at a check point in Imphal. The man was seen being driven into an infantry camp, in the same complex as a police station, yet all personnel have denied his arrest. His relatives have been obstructed from speaking with senior army and police officers, and they fear that the man will become victim to a fake encounter killing. A high level investigation into his whereabouts must be launched immediately.

CASE NARRATIVE:

According to information we have received, on 3 August 2010 at around 5.30pm Mr. Leimakhujam Kokulo Singh and his wife Maniton Devi were returning home in an auto-rickshaw from Wahengbam Leikai in Imphal, with eleven other passengers in the vehicle. On reaching a place along the Imphal-Sangaithel Road called Patsoi Lai Umang, the vehicle was stopped at a checking point by an army team in combat uniform.

The army personnel instructed the male passengers to exit the bus and told the women to remain seated. After questioning and searching the male passengers, the soldiers were seen dragging Kokulo into a white vehicle, which was driven away. The army did not issue an arrest memo, which is mandatory according to the guidelines of the Supreme Court of India.

Ms. Maniton managed to flag an auto-rickshaw and follow the army vehicle, a Maruti Gypsy. She saw it enter the Maratha Light Infantry camp, which is part of the Indian Army and stationed in the same complex as Patsoi Police Station. Maniton returned home immediately and alerted her family. Shortly after this, at about 8pm Kokulo’s brother received a call from an unknown man warning that Kokulo would be killed.

At around 9pm, after consultation with the village elders, Kokulo’s family went to Patsoi Police Station with around 20 local women. They report that two security personnel were stationed at the entrance gate, one belonging to the police and the other from the army. The women asked to meet with the Officer-in-Charge of the police station, but the soldier intervened and turned them away.

The next day the family and other villagers went to the police station again and met with army personnel at the Maratha Light Infantry Camp, who denied any reports of such an arrest.

The family then submitted a written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge of the police station. At the time of writing, Kokulo’s whereabouts remain untraced.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The militarization of the Indian State of Manipur, backed by laws such as the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, has lead to systematic and widespread abuses being perpetrated with relative impunity by security force personnel. Most of these go largely unaddressed despite the best efforts of victims and their families.

Since July 2003 the Asian Human Rights Commission has reported more than two dozen cases of illegal arrests and executions carried out by security personnel who claim the deceased were killed in self defence during armed ‘encounters.' In none of the cases has credible proof been offered, or an impartial inquiry been conducted to determine the whereabouts of the disappeared. As far as we have been able to gather, none of the perpetrators have ever been held accountable for their actions.

To find more examples of such cases please see: A shopkeeper is illegally arrested and executed by Manipur security forces (UAC-056-2010) in which a shopkeeper was killed during what a claimed 'encounter'. Nevertheless when his body was delivered to his family it had fifteen bullet wounds, and had been dressed in combat clothing without holes or damage. Rather than order an investigation into the case, the Chief Minister of Manipur simply offered jobs and money to the family of the victim.

For a more detailed analysis of the pattern of extrajudicial executions in Manipur please see the additional information in: Manipur police kill another in extra-judicial circumstances (UAC-029-2010)

Since this case follows a common pattern of disappearances and extrajudicial killing in Manipur, the AHRC has strong concerns for the safety and security of Kokulo Singh, and immediate intervention is necessary. Those who seized him must be called upon to produce him and explain their actions. Should it be discovered that the operated outside of the law, they must face the relevant legal charges.

SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please join us in writing to the authorities listed below asking for their urgent intervention.

Please be informed that the AHRC is writing to the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances regarding this case.

To support this appeal please click here:

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

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

INDIA: A man's life is at risk and his fate is unknown after his illegal arrest by the army in Manipur

Name of victim: Mr. Leimakhujam Kokulo Singh, permanent resident of Haorang Keirel Makha Leikai, under PO and PS Patsoi, Imphal West District, Manipur, India
Names of alleged perpetrators: Maratha Light Infantry Camp of Indian Army stationed at Patsoi Police Station
Date of incident: 3 August 2010
Place of incident: Patsoi Lai Umang along the Imphal-Sangaithel Road

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the arrest and subsequent disappearance of Mr. Leimakhujam Kokulo Singh. According to the information I have received from the Asian Human Rights Commission, on 3 August 2010 at around 5.30pm Mr. Singh and his wife Maniton Devi were returning home in an auto-rickshaw from Wahengbam Leikai in Imphal, with eleven other passengers in the vehicle. On reaching a place along the Imphal-Sangaithel Road called Patsoi Lai Umang, the vehicle was stopped at a check point by an army team in combat uniform.

The army personnel instructed the male passengers to exit the bus and told the women to remain seated. After questioning and searching the male passengers, the soldiers were seen dragging Mr. Singh into a white vehicle, which was driven away. The army did not issue an arrest memo, which is mandatory according to the guidelines of the Supreme Court of India.

I understand that Ms. Maniton managed to flag an auto-rickshaw and follow the army vehicle, a Maruti Gypsy. She saw it enter the Maratha Light Infantry camp, which is part of the Indian Army and stationed in the same complex as Patsoi Police Station. Ms. Maniton returned home immediately and alerted her family. Shortly after this, at about 8pm Mr. Singh’s brother received a call from an unknown man warning that Mr. Singh would be killed because he had opposed them in some way.

At around 9pm, after consultation with the village elders, Mr. Singh’s family went to Patsoi Police Station with around 20 local women. They report that two security personnel were stationed at the entrance gate, one belonging to the police and the other from the army. The women asked to meet with the Officer-in-Charge of the police station, but the soldier intervened and turned them away.

The next day the family and other villagers went to the police station again and met with army personnel at the Maratha Light Infantry Camp, who denied any reports of such an arrest. I am told that the family then submitted a written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge of the police station.

I know that at the time of writing, the whereabouts of Mr. Singh remain untraced.

I am aware that illegal arrests and enforced disappearances of civilians by army personnel are frequent in Manipur, and that in most cases it leads to the family being later informed that the disappeared was killed in an armed encounter. I further know that in very few cases is an impartial inquiry conducted to determine the veracity of the military claim, and that as a result impunity for abuses of security personnel prevails in Manipur.

In consideration of this widespread pattern, I am extremely concerned that the life of Mr. Singh is at imminent risk, despite clear information about those responsible for his abduction. His whereabouts must be disclosed urgently, his safety ensured, and those accountable for his illegal arrest investigated by the laws of the country.

Please ensure that such an investigation is immediately undertaken, and that the Indian Army cooperates fully. I also urge you to provide the victim’s family with adequate protection.

Yours sincerely,


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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. A. K. Anthony
Defense Minister
Government of India, 104 South Block
New Delhi
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 23015403

2. Dr. P. Chidambaram
Home Minister
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

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

4. Sri Y Joykumar Singh, DGP
PHQ Imphal Manipur
795001 Imphal, Manipur
INDIA
Fax + 91 385 2223829
E-mail: dgp.mnp@hub.nic.in

5. Mr. Okram Ibobi Singh
Chief Minister of Manipur
New Secretariat Building
Bapupara, Imphal, Manipur
INDIA
Fax + 91 385 2451398
E-mail: cmmani@hub.nic.in

6. Chief Secretary, Manipur
Old Secretariat Building
Bapupara, Imphal, Manipur
INDIA
Fax + 91 385 2222629
E-mail: csecmani@hub.nic.in

-------------------------------
Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-116-2010
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.