Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDIA: Alleged torture of an innocent person by the Kerala state police
 

INDIA: Alleged torture of an innocent person by the Kerala state police

October 24, 2006

URGENT APPEAL URGENT APPEAL URGENT APPEAL URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal

25 October 2006
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-349-2006: INDIA: Alleged torture of an innocent person by the Kerala state police

INDIA: Custodial torture; impunity; failure of rule of law
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from our local partner in Kerala, India that an innocent man was taken into custody and brutally tortured in custody on 9 October 2006 at the Mannuthy police station in Thrissur district of Kerala state. The victim Mr. Wilson was brutally tortured at the police station under the direction of the District Superintindent of Police Mr. Chandran and the Ollur Circile Inspector of Police Mr. Ramachandran. It is alleged that the Circle Inspector was present at the police station while the victim was tortured to confess the crime and that he also assaulted the victim along with other police constables.

DETAILS OF THE CASE:

On 4 October 2006, the dead body of a ten year old boy Sai, who belongs to a group of gypsies camped in the outskirts of a rubber plantation in Mannuthy in Thrissur district, was found in the rubber plantation. The discovery of the body was reported to Mannuthy police station which has the jurisdiction over the place where the boy's body was discovered.

The victim Mr. Wilson, a welder by profession resides near the rubber plantation mentioned forehead. He works in a local workshop in Mannuthy. Wilson used to go to the plantation to collect twigs for firewood. On 9 October at about 4pm, when Wilson was collecting firewood in the rubber plantation, he was summoned by a police constable along with three other police officers allegedly to ask a few questions regarding the boy's death. All of them were on motorbikes and they asked Wilson whether he was aware of the discovery of the boy's body in the plantation. Wilson said that he was aware of the incident. The police officers then asked him what he was doing in the plantation for which Wilson answered that he was gathering firewood and he used to do it every alternate day or whenever he had some time to spare. The police officers then asked him to leave the firewood he had collected at his house and to accompany them to the police station since they wanted to question him regarding the boy's death. Wilson informed the police officers that even though he had nothing to do with the boy's death he is willing to accompany the officers to the police station. Wilson was taken to the Mannuthy police station on the motorbike of one of the officers.

At the police station, the Sub Inspector of police was not present. However, the Circle Inspector of Police Mr. Ramachandran was occupying the Sub Inspector's office. Ramachandran is stationed at Ollur Circle police station, which entertains jurisdiction over Mannuthy police station. Once at the police station, a police constable Mr. Raphy punched Wilson behind his neck. Wilson fell down and screamed with pain. Raphy punched Wilson shouting "son of a bitch why did you kill the boy?". Wilson got up and said he did not do anything and he has nothing to do with the boy's death. The Circle Inspector then ordered the constables to remove Wilson's dress. The constables removed all the clothes Wilson was wearing. Wilson tried to protest since he was made naked in the police station in front of other police officers and the public who was present at the police station for various reasons.

Then the officers asked Wilson to hold his penis out for the officers to inspect his genitalia. The examination was done in public in front of the others present in the police station which was extremely humiliating. It is alleged that the officers examined Wilson's genitalia since they suspected that the boy was sexually abused before the murder. Following the examination, police constable Mr. Ansar slapped Wilson on his face and asked him whether he is willing to confess that he was responsible for the boy's murder. Wilson pleaded not guilty. Then another police constable Mr. Radhakrishnan started flicking on Wilson's nose-tip asking him to confess the crime. Wilson refused and he continued pleading innocence. Then the Circle Inspector approached him and punched Wilson in his stomach and shouted at the officers to bring Wilson to an adjacent room.

The officers ordered Wilson to sit down in a chair and the officers surrounded him and started asking questions about his involvement in the boy's murder. Wilson though was pleading innocence, he was asked to answer the officers each time they asked a question by turning his head to the officer who asked the question, without moving from his chair. Some officers were seated behind Wilson and were asking him questions from behind, for which Wilson had to turn his head without moving his body. The questioning continued for a few hours and finally the officers were convinced that Wilson was not responsible for the boy's death. The officers let Wilson off but ordered that he must report at the police station everyday at 5pm. Fearing further detention and torture Wilson agreed. Accordingly Wilson would report at the police station at 5pm and will have to wait till 9pm for him to be allowed to sign a register kept at the station. On October 13, Wilson was asked that he need not report at the station anymore. However, it was later known that the actual accused is one of the gypsies who was later arrested and detained.

Wilson's experience is not a unique case from India and is yet another example of how the police conduct criminal investigation in India. Criminal investigation in the local context means confession extracted by brutal torture. The government of India and its state governments deny that custodial torture is practiced in India. There is no means by which officers responsible for engaging in custodial torture could be punished in India. Recently when cases of custodial deaths were reported in an alarming number from Kerala, the state government took the initiative to constitute an inquiry commission led by a retired High Court Judge to inquire into cases of custodial violence reported from the state between 1 April 2006 and 16 August 2006.

The commission started functioning on 18 September 2006 and a public notice was issued by the commission dated 29 September 2006 published through local dailies on 7 October 2006 calling for reports and complaints to be submitted to the commission's office at House number 34/978-A, Gouri, Edappilli, Anjamana Road, Kochi, Kerala, within ten days from the date of the notice. This late notice by the commission addressed to the general public literally means that anyone who wished to complain against the police must do so within a day or else the commission would not accept such complaints since they were not submitted within time.

The functioning of the commission is questionable since the public was informed about the address to which the communications and complaints were to be mailed through a backdated notice which left 24 hours for the victims to complain. The mandate of the commission will expire in three months starting from 18 September 2006. The AHRC views the constitution of the commission as a whitewash to cover-up the state of policing in the state. In spite of this the AHRC through its local partner has submitted 12 cases for the commission's consideration.

Wilson is willing to lodge a complaint at the local magistrate's court about the torture meted out against him. However, the existing law in India only provide for the magistrate to forward the complaint filed by Wilson to the same officer who has authorised the use of torture. In reasonably functioning jurisdictions such anomalies are overcome by appropriate legislations and mechanisms so that any atrocities committed by the law enforcement officers are investigated and the offenders punished. However, in India, the government is engaged in the game of filling holes with darkness and false statements on issues like custodial torture.

India has signed the United Nations International Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) but refused to ratify the convention fearing obligations to implement the convention at the domestic level. However, a recent statement by the government has made clear that the government is planning to ratify the convention soon. Even if the government ratifies the convention against torture, there must be effective implementation of the convention within the country for which considerable change in policing is required in addition to domestic legislations put in place.

India is a country where even the directives issued by the Supreme Court of India are openly negated in practice. One such example, applicable in this case, is the well known judgment in the D.K Basu case (SHRI D.K. BASU v State of West Bengal). In this case, decided in 1996, the Supreme Court of India has instructed the government to make sure that fair practices are followed while arresting and detaining a person and also while investigating a crime. These provisions were intended to bring down instances of custodial torture. However the implementation of the directives of the court is limited to posting a copy of the court's directives in a remote corner of every police station. There has been not even the slightest decrease in the number of torture or atrocities committed by the police in India in the last decade. On the contrary, the number of such cases has increased to an alarming extent. The custodial deaths reported from Kerala and this case is yet another addition to this number.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter to the relevant authorities mentioned below urging for an immediate and thorough investigation into this case so that disciplinary actions are taken against the alleged perpetrators.

To support this appeal, please click:

Sample letter:

Dear __________,

INDIA:  An innocent person tortured by the Kerala state police

Name of the victim: Mr. Wilson, aged about 42 years, son of William, residing at Atuparambil house, Mannuthy post, Thrissur district, Kerala state
Alleged perpetrators:
1) Mr. Ramachandran, Circle Inspector of Police, Ollur Circle Office, Thrissur district, Kerala state
2) Mr. Radhakrishnan
3) Mr. Raphy
4) Mr. Jayan
5) Mr. Ansar
6) Mr. Gopalakrishnan
[2 to 6 above are Police Constables stationed at Mannuthy Police Station, Thrissur District, Kerala state]
7. Mr. Chandran, District Superintendent of Police, SP's Office, Civil Station, Thrissur, Kerala
Date of the incident: 9 October 2006
Place of Incident: Mannuthy police station, Thrissur district, Kerala

I am writing to you to express my concern about the case of torture of Mr. Wilson, the victim named above on 9 October 2006 at Mannuthy police station, Thrissur district, Kerala. I am informed that Wilson who was taken into custody as a suspect in a murder case was brutally tortured at the police station by the police officers. It is shocking to know that the Circle Inspector of Police was himself assaulting the victim and that too under the directions of the District Superintendent of Police.

It is alleged that Wilson was punched and slapped by the officers and that he was examined after being stripped in public at the police station by the police officers. It is also alleged that even though Wilson was set free the same day night he was forced to report at the police station for four days to sign some register. It is also alleged that the actual accused was later arrested and currently detained for trail.

It is shocking to know that several cases of custodial deaths and torture are reported from police stations in Kerala. However, it is disheartening to know that the state government is doing nothing to prevent custodial torture. The state government has publicly announced that it does not tolerate custodial violence anymore. However, I am concerned that nothing is being done by the government to prevent custodial violence, other than publicly stating that it is neither a government policy nor an action which the government would tolerate.

In these circumstances I urge you to take this case as one of the model cases where the perpetrators are punished in accordance with the existing law of the country. I also urge you to pressure the government of India to ratify the United Nations International convention against United Nations International Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and to come up with a domestic legislation to implement the convention in India.

I also request you to pay interim compensation to Wilson pending further inquiry into the case. The police officers involved in this case must be punished, if they are found guilty of the offense. I am also informed that Wilson is willing to file a complaint at the local magistrate court and that he fears that the police will further torture him if they are informed that Wilson is taking steps to prosecute the officers involved in his case. I request you to take all necessary steps to ensure that the police officers involved in this case will not intimidate Wilson to force him to withdraw his case.

Sincerely yours,


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


PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:

1. Mr. Manmohan Singh
Prime Minister of India
Prime Minister's Office
Room number 152, South Block
New Delhi
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 23016857
Email: pmosb@pmo.nic.in

2. Justice V. K. Bali
Chief Justice
High Court of Kerala
Kochi, Kerala state
INDIA
Email: highcourt@ker.nic.in 

3. Mr. V. S. Achuthanandan
Chief Minister
Government of Kerala
North Block, Secretariat,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
INDIA
Tel: +91 471 2333812/ 2333682
Fax: +91471 2333489
Email: chiefminister@kerala.gov.in

4. Mr. Kodiyeri Balakrishnan
Minister of Home Affairs
Government of Kerala
Room No.216, Third Floor,
North Sandwich Block,
Govt. Secretariat,
Thiruvananthapuram 1,  Kerala
INDIA
Tel:  +91 471 2327976, 2327876
Email: minister-home@kerala.gov.in

5. Mr. Oomen Chandy
Opposition Leader
Puthupally House, Jagathy,
Thiruvannathapuram,
Kerala
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 471 2315625

6. Mr. Raman Srivastava
Director General of Police
Government of Kerala
Police Head Quarters
Thiruvanandapuram,
Kerala
INDIA
Fax: +91 471 2729434
Email: dgn@scrb.org

7. Justice A. S. Anand
Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission of India
Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg
New Delhi 110001
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 23384863
Email: covdnhrc@nic.in, ionhrc@nic.in 

8. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
C/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (general)

9. The Secretary
Justice Rajendra Babu Commission of Inquiry
Gowri, House number 34/978 – A
Edappilly South, Anjamana Road,
Kochi, Kerala
INDIA


Thank you.

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


Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-349-2006
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.