Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDIA/NEPAL: Fear for lives of deported Nepalese after detention in India
 

INDIA/NEPAL: Fear for lives of deported Nepalese after detention in India

July 11, 2002

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION
<br>

<br>
ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM
<br>

<br>
12 July 2002
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
UA-29-2002: Illegal detention and deportation
<br>

<br>
INDIA/NEPAL: Fear for lives of deported Nepalese after detention in India
<br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>

<br>
Indian police detained 13 people in New Delhi on July 11, 2002, including Mr. Gautam Navlakha, a human rights activist who is a member of the Indo-Nepalese Solidarity Forum that has advocated, among other things, an end to the state of emergency in Nepal and dialogue between the Nepalese government and insurgents to resolve the country's problems through negotiations.
<br>

<br>
Of the 13 people detained, nine were Indian citizens, and four people were from Nepal. Mr. Navlakha, who was detained at about 5:30 p.m., was released three hours later along with the eight other Indians.
<br>

<br>
The four Nepalese men and women, however, were detained until July 12 when they were deported to Nepal where it is feared they will be killed, especially since three of the four people detained are journalists, which have faced arrest, torture and even death in custody since the government declared a state of emergency on Nov. 26, 2001. None of the detentions in India were made with an arrest warrant nor were any charges filed against the detainees. The four Nepalese detained and deported are:
<br>

<br>
- Mr. Partho Chhetri, a journalist
<br>
- Mr. Maheshwar Dahal, a journalist
<br>
- Mr. Moti Parsad, who is believed to be a student
<br>
- Ms. Aditi, a journalist whose surname is unknown at this time
<br>

<br>
These deportations were made in spite of decisions by the Supreme Court of India in a number of cases that the Indian government should not deport people to countries where their lives might be endangered.
<br>

<br>
All four of the Nepalese people who were detained are associated with Nepali Ekta Samaj, a social welfare organisation that has been serving millions of Nepalese people living in India for 23 years. The organisation, which has 20,000 members throughout the country, has been banned, however, by the Indian government under the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) because of suspected links with insurgents in Nepal. POTO, which was enacted by the Indian government in October 2001, has been condemned by human rights groups in India and throughout Asia for its draconian measures. It is maintained, however, that Nepali Ekta Samaj has not taken any action or has been involved in any activity that is unlawful in India.
<br>

<br>
It is believed that the arrest of these four people is the beginning of a crackdown by the Indian government against Nepalese people living in India.
<br>

<br>

<br>
SUGGESTED ACTION
<br>

<br>
Please write a letter to the prime minister, president and home minister of India condemning the Indian government for detaining the people above and deporting the four Nepalese men and women to Nepal.
<br>

<br>
Please write another letter to the Nepalese government requesting that the rights of the four people above be respected and that they not be harmed in any way.
<br>

<br>

<br>
SUGGESTED LETTER FOR INDIAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
<br>

<br>
Dear Sir,
<br>

<br>
Re: Illegal detention and deportation
<br>

<br>
I have recently learned about the detention of 13 people on July 11, 2002, in New Delhi that includes human rights activist Gautam Navlakha and four people from Nepal who reside in India - Mr. Partho Chhetri, Mr. Maheshwar Dahal, Mr. Moti Parsad and a woman named Aditi whose surname is unfortunately unknown at this time. I am concerned that they were detained without the use of any arrest warrant and without any charges being filed against them. I am both saddened and angered that your government deported these four Nepalese men and women to Nepal where it is feared they will be killed. You have failed to heed the decision of your country's Supreme Court in a number of cases that the Indian government should not deport people to countries where their lives might be put in danger. You have not applied this principle in this case, for it must be kept in mind that three of the four Nepalese people who were detained - Mr. Partho Chhetri, Mr. Maheshwar Dahal and Aditi - are journalists and that journalists in Nepal have faced arrest, torture and even death in custody since the Nepalese government declared a state of emergency on Nov. 26, 2001.
<br>

<br>
In closing, I hope that others in India will not be detained by your government in the same manner as these people and that these cases do not foreshadow a new policy by your government to deport Nepalese people living in your country to Nepal where they face grave danger and a threat to their lives.
<br>

<br>
Thank you.
<br>

<br>
Sincerely yours,
<br>

<br>

<br>
SUGGESTED LETTER TO GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS IN NEPAL
<br>

<br>
Dear Sir,
<br>

<br>
Re: Respect for rights of deported citizens of Nepal
<br>

<br>
I have learned about the recent detention and deportation of four Nepalese citizens from India to Nepal - Mr. Partho Chhetri, Mr. Maheshwar Dahal, Mr. Moti Parsad and a woman named Aditi whose surname is unfortunately unknown at this time. They were detained by the police in New Delhi on July 11, 2002, and deported the next day to Nepal. I ask that the rights of these people are respected, especially since three of the people above are journalists, and it is well-known outside of Nepal that a larger number of journalists have been arrested, tortured and have even died in custody since your government declared a state of emergency on Nov. 26 last year. Thus, I ask that these people are not harmed in any way.
<br>

<br>
Thank you for your prompt attention to this serious matter.
<br>

<br>
Sincerely yours,
<br>

<br>

<br>
PLEASE SEND A LETTER BY FAX OR EMAIL TO:
<br>

<br>
- Indian Government Officials
<br>

<br>
1. H.E. Atal Bihari Vajpayee
<br>
Prime Minister
<br>
South Block, Raisina Hill,
<br>
New Delhi, India-110 011
<br>
INDIA
<br>
Fax: 91-11-3019545 / 91-11-3016857
<br>
Email: eindun@undp.org
<br>

<br>
2. Shri K. R. Narayanan
<br>
President of India
<br>
H.E. President of India
<br>
Office of the President
<br>
Rashtrapati Bhawan
<br>
New Delhi, 110004
<br>
INDIA
<br>
Fax: +91 11 301-7290
<br>
E-mail: pressecy@alpha.nic.in
<br>

<br>
3. Mr L.K. Advani
<br>
Home Minister of India
<br>
South Block, Raisina Hill,
<br>
New Dehli 110 001,
<br>
INDIA
<br>
Fax: +91 11 301-5750
<br>

<br>
- Nepalese Government Officials
<br>

<br>
1. Mr. Sher Bahadur Deuba
<br>
Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Nepal
<br>
Office of the Prime Minister
<br>
Singha Durbar
<br>
Kathmandu, NEPAL
<br>
Tel: +977 1 227955 or 1 228555
<br>
Fax: +977 1 227786
<br>

<br>
2. Mr. Khum Bahadur Khadka
<br>
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Home Affairs
<br>
Ministry of Home Affairs
<br>
Singha Durbar
<br>
Kathmandu, NEPAL
<br>
Tel: +977 1 224737
<br>
Fax: +977 1 227186 or 1 227187
<br>

<br>
3. Mr. Keshav Prasad Upadhaya
<br>
Chief Justice
<br>
Tel: +977 1 262546
<br>
Fax: +977 1 262878
<br>

<br>

<br>

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-29-2002
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.