Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDIA: Paddy farmer murdered to conceal corruption amongst Border Security Force officials with cross border smugglers

INDIA: Paddy farmer murdered to conceal corruption amongst Border Security Force officials with cross border smugglers

May 30, 2006

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

30 May 2006
------------------------------------------------------
UA-174-2006: INDIA: Paddy farmer murdered to conceal corruption amongst Border Security Force officials with cross border smugglers

INDIA: Murder; torture, corruption; cross-border smuggling; collapse in the rule of law
-------------------------------------------------------
Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received the following information regarding the brutal death of farmer Mr. Bagbul Islam Mondal from its partner organisation Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (Masum).

On 12 May 2006, Mr. Bagbul and his brother Masidul were working on their farm cultivating paddy crops at dag. No 273 and 274 of Mouza-Paschim Char, Majhar Diar, Raninagar P.S. At about 11 pm the brothers spotted smugglers trafficking cows and buffalos through their fields towards the Indo-Bangladesh Border. Bagbul and Masidul were concerned for their crops and they tried to confront the smugglers and get them to stop. However, the resistance proved ineffective as the smugglers continued to force the cattle through the crops.

Bagbul and Masidul were travelling home. As they crossed BSF Road near a culvert, they were met by three armed Border Security Forces (BSF) personnel of the Kaharpara Camp of 136 Battalion stationed at the No.8 out post. The officers proceeded to interrogate the brothers and tried to forcibly take them into custody. In the course of the struggle Masidul succeeded to escape but Bagbul was captured. It was reported that the officers then began assaulting Bagbul repeatedly with Lathis (sticks). One of the armed BSF officers fired a shot which penetrated Bagbul’s left armpit. It is alleged that the bullet may have instantaneously killed Bagbul.

On May 13 Bagbul’s wife, Mrs. Nargis Bewa, and relatives tried to file a complaint of murder against the BSF personnel but the Officer in Charge (OC) of Raninagar Police Station, Mr. Samit Bhattacharya S.I, refused to record the complaint and insisted that he would only take the complaint after the post mortem had been conducted. On instructions, Mrs. Bewa returned to the said police station on May 14 after the post mortem and funeral, but was told that the OC was not present and an Assistant Sub Inspector who was present refused to take-down the complaint.

Mrs. Bewa then posted the complaint to Raninagar police station by registered post on May 15 and subsequently made a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad, on May 19. She urged for an immediate investigation and for legal action to be taken against the BSF officers and the police.

On May 26 Masum contacted Mr. Samit Bhattacharya enquiring about the case. The OC denied all knowledge of receiving any complaint from the victim’s family. Mr. Bhattacharya was also informed that upon the death of Bagbul the case was registered at Raninagar PS as an ‘Unnatural Death’ (UD Case No. 09/06). Masum was informed that a case was also initiated by a complaint made by the BSF personnel under Sections 147, 148, 149, 146, 186, 353 & 307 of the Indian Penal Code. An autopsy report was made on May 13 at the Lalbagh Sub Divisional Hospital, Murshidabad, under Post Mortem Report no. 101. Mr. Bhattacharya further informed Masum that the firearm had been discharged in an act of self defense. However, he then categorically stated that there were no significant injuries on any of the BSF personnel and that no BSF officers had complained of the possession of firearms by the victim at the time of firing. It is evident that the allegations clearly contradict witness testimonies and that there is nothing to indicate that the gravity of the situation at the time necessitated open fire.

BACKGROUND

One of the major issues plaguing the bilateral relationship between the India and Bangladesh is border security. India shares its largest border with Bangladesh, a border which is extremely porous. The border crosses rivers, villages, paddy fields and jute fields, making it easy to cross. For many years this border has been facing problems with illegal immigration, smuggling, arms trafficking, drug trafficking and the trafficking of women and children. To deal with some of these problems India has deployed border security forces to deal with infiltration from over the border. However, no consideration has been afforded to people near the border area, a “no man’s land”, who have predominantly been branded as immigrants from Bangladesh.

The Government of India erected boundary fencing and a boundary road to prevent ‘infiltration’. In many places of Nadia, Murshidabad, North 24 Parganas, South 24 Parganas, Dinajpur and other areas, this fencing and border road (BSF road) runs 5-10 kilometers inside the Indian territory from the actual border. In these areas many of the local people who have resided there for centuries cannot gain entry into their own land without the ‘permission’ of the BSF. In many areas, school buildings, temples, and mosques fall on the other side of the fencing. Only twice daily can people use this border road or enter or leave from the fencing gate: once in the morning for half an hour and once in the evening for half an hour.

Farmers are dependent upon the protection of the BSF to continue their likelihood and are also at their mercy as to whether they infringe upon their rights. Due to this situation, common legal remedies are meaningless and farmers are suppressed from voicing their concerns. The AHRC has been monitoring the situation near the Indo-Bangladesh Borders and this is by no means an isolated incident (see further UA-146-2006). The BSF personnel enjoy absolute impunity and it has become common practice for officers to profit from illegal trade and exploit situations by colluding with smugglers.

There are many contentious issues involved in this incident that must be addressed by the appropriate authorities:

1. It is clear that given the details, the complaint presented at the police station should have warranted the registration of a report in itself and that the establishment of the cause of death was not a condition for this to occur. The failure to acknowledge this fact has led to a delay in the investigation and must in itself be properly investigated.

2. The allegation contained in the report reflects a case under Section 302 of the IPC. The police should have registered a case under this section at the first instance and not register the case as an ‘Unnatural Death’, which is conceptually broad and weak.  

3. The AHRC has reported previous brutal deaths with the involvement of BSF officers from Out Post No.1 (see further UA-146-2006) where the police have also refused to register the complaint. An investigation must be afforded to examine the corruption surrounding illegal trade and the role that the BSF and police play in such activities.


SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send letters to the relevant authorities seeking for immediate and proper investigation into the incident.

Suggested letter:

Dear ___________,

INDIA: Paddy farmer murdered to conceal corruption amongst Border Security Force officials and cross border smugglers

Name of the victim: Bagbul Islam Mondal alias Bagbul Sk. Son of the late Khalilur Mondal, Village- Kalbali Tala, P.O. – Jinnatpara, P.S.- Raninagar, District – Murshidabad.
Name of the alleged perpetrator: Three armed personnel of Border Security Force, Kaharpara Camp, 136 no. Battalion.
Place of incident: Northeastern Part of Harudanga Village
Date of incident:  12 May 2006

I write to draw your attention to a killing committed on the pretext of self-defense by Border Security Forces (BSF) in Indo- Bangladesh bordering area of Jalangi of Murshidabad district, West Bengal.

On 12 May 2006, Mr. Bagbul and his brother Masidul were working on their farm cultivating paddy crops. At about 11pm the brothers spotted smugglers trafficking cows and buffalos through their fields towards the Indo-Bangladesh Border. Though Bagbul and Masidul tried to avoid a confrontation with the smugglers, the smugglers continued to push the cattle through the fields causing serious damage. Bagbul and Masidul proceeded home and, on the way across the BSF Road and near a culvert, they were met with three armed Border Security Forces (BSF) personnel of the Kaharpara Camp of 136 Battalion stationed at the No.8 outpost.

The officers proceeded to interrogate the brothers trying to forcibly take them into custody. In the course of the struggle Masidul succeeded to escape but Bagbul was captured. It was reported that the officers then began assaulting Bagbul with Lathis (stick). One of the armed BSF officers fired a shot that penetrated Bagbul’s left armpit. It is alleged that the bullet killed Bagbul instantaneously. An autopsy was conducted on the body at the Lalbagh Sub Divisional Hospital, Murshidabad on May 13 and video report, number 101, was also prepared.

On May 13, Bagbul’s wife and relatives tried to file a murder complaint against the BSF personnel but the Officer in Charge (OC) of Raninagar Police Station, Mr. Samit Bhattacharya, refused to record the complaint and insisted that he would take the complaint only after the post mortem had been conducted. On instructions, the wife of the victim returned to the said police station on May 14 after the post mortem and funeral, but was told that the OC was not present and an assistant Sub Inspector refused to take the complaint. In an enquiry made by Masum on May 26 it was learnt that the case was eventually registered under the Raninagar Police Station as an ‘Unnatural Death’ case (UD Case No. 09/06).

Masum was also informed that a complaint was filed by the BSF under Section 147, 148, 149, 146, 186, 353 & 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) alleging that the gun fire was an act of self defense. It is evident that these allegations contradict the witness testimonies and there is no evidence illustrating the gravity of the situation that allegedly necessitated open fire at the time.

It is clear that given the details, the allegation should have warranted the registration of a report independent of the establishment of the cause of death. The failure to acknowledge this fact has led to a delay in the investigation and must be properly investigated.

The allegation contained in the report itself reflects a case under Section 302 of the IPC. The police should have registered a case under this section at the first instance and not that of an ‘Unnatural Death’, which is conceptually broad and weak as it encompasses accidents, misadventure, suicide and murder.  

I am aware that this is not the only brutal death involving BSF officers from Out Post No.1. An investigation must be afforded to examine illegal trade and the role that the BSF and police play in such activities. There are many contentious issues regarding this incident that must be addressed by the appropriate authorities.

Yours sincerely,
______________________________

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee
Chief Minister and Minister in Charge of Home (Police) Department
Government of West Bengal
Writers' Buildings
Kolkata - 700001
West Bengal
INDIA
Tel: +91 33 2214 5555 (O) / 2280 0631 (R)
Fax: +91 33 2214 5480
Email: cm@wb.gov.in

2. Mr. Subhash Awasthi
Director General of Police
Government of West Bengal
Writers Buildings
Kolkata - 1
West Bengal
INDIA
Fax: +91 33 2214 4498 / 2214 5486
Email: padgp@wbpolice.gov.in

3. Mr. P.R. Ray
Home Secretary
Government of West Bengal
Writers' Buildings
Kolkata - 700001
West Bengal
INDIA
Tel: +91 33 2214 5656
Fax: +91 33 2214 3001
Email: sechome@wb.gov.in

4. Justice Shyamal Kumar Sen
Chairperson
West Bengal Human Rights Commission
Bhabani Bhavan, Alipore
Kolkata – 700027
West Bengal
INDIA
Tel: +91 33 4797259 / 5558866
Fax: +91 33 4799633
Email: wbhrc@cal3.vsnl.net.in

5. Mr. Justice A. S. Anand
Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission of India
Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg
New Delhi -110001
INDIA
Tel: +91 11 23074448
Fax: +91 11 2334 0016
E-mail: chairnhrc@nic.in

6. Mr. Shivraj V. Patil
Home Minister
Ministry of Home Affairs
Jaisalmer Hosue
New Delhi
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 23094221/ 23794833
 
7. The Director General
Border Security Force
B-10, CGO Complex
New Delhi
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 24361202
 
8. Inspector General (Administration)
Border Security Force
B-10, CGO Complex
New Delhi
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 24361202

9. Mr. Manjunath Prasad
District Magistrate - Murshidabad
Murshidabad
West Bengal
INDIA
Fax: +91 34 8225 0145

10. Mr. Philip Alston
Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions
Atten: Lydie Ventre
Room 3-016
c/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9155
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON EXTRA-JUDICIAL, SUMMARY, OR ARBITRARY EXECUTIONS)
Email: lventre@ohchr.org

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ahrchk@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-174-2006
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.