Model Answer Supporting Admission of International Monitors

The Reform Agenda

Grant admission to the UN Human Rights Commission's Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions to evaluate reported violations of the right to life in Kashmir.
Grant admission to Punjab and Kashmir for fact-finding missions by Amnesty International of London and Human Rights Watch of N.Y.
Allow the ICRC unrestricted access to places of detention in Kashmir and Punjab.

Rationale

India's reputation is in tatters. Throughout the world people believe that Indian police and security forces torture and mutilate detainees, commit summary executions, rape women prisoners, and eliminate defense lawyers and journalists who question abuses. For the past five years respected UN experts, the U.S. State Department, and two highly regarded NGOs have exposed grievous human rights violations, especially in Kashmir and Punjab.

As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, India reported to the UN Human Rights Committee about emergency legislation used to detain separatist insurgents. The UN committee experts found those laws in conflict with India's covenant obligations to respect due process.

The annual U.S. State Department human rights reports on India detail numerous flagrant cases of extrajudicial killing, torture, and disappearances. When informed, the Punjab government reportedly ignores hard evidence and fails to hold police accountable for grave misconduct.

Amnesty International has identified hundreds of victims by name in widely disseminated reports that our government has been unable to explain. Human Rights Watch has further documented atrocities. India's response has been to deny those NGO groups permission to visit Kashmir and Punjab, fueling suspicions of a cover-up.

India's UN representatives objected strongly when South Africa refused to admit international observers investigating torture and killing of ANC freedom fighters. India should not apply a double standard when its own practices are questioned; the government should welcome objective international monitors from the UN. Indian citizens have conducted NGO human rights missions and observed trials in other countries. The government can grant similar access to NGOs such as Amnesty International that have confronted situations in Pakistan and elsewhere with the same objectivity shown in their reports on India.

Congress (I) need not cater to Hindu extremists. Mainstream voters demanding respect for fundamental human rights welcome international cooperation and support Indian human rights organizations such as the People's Union for Civil Liberties, the People's Union for Democratic Rights, the South Asia Human Rights Documentation Center, and Citizens for Democracy. Many of our government prosecutors might also be open to assistance from abroad in addressing official misconduct. State ministers have protested vehemently when Punjabi security personnel violated territorial jurisdiction by seizing and killing Sikhs in Calcutta, Delhi, and Uttar Pradesh.

NGO critics can not be silenced by exclusion. When denied official permission to conduct fact-finding, Human Rights Watch sent unidentified monitors as "tourists" to collect and publish damaging information. India is not a totalitarian society like North Korea. A democracy can not muzzle the free press which reports the damaging facts collected by human rights NGOs.
Cooperation can pay dividends. India can enlist NGOs in its public relations struggle against Pakistan and terrorists by showing that the government has nothing to hide. Human Rights Watch has been severely critical of Pakistan and the secessionists. The HRW Arms Project effectively exposed Pakistan's illegal conduct in a 1994 report Arms and Abuses in Indian Punjab and Kashmir. HRW documented how CIA supplied arms provided for Afghan muhajadin were diverted by Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to Sikh and Muslim separatists. After exposing terrorist war crimes against civilians, HRW demanded that those groups comply with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

Exclusion fuels suspicion, encouraging more critical reports. When India allowed Amnesty International to visit prisons in Bombay, their report was considerably more respectful. Recent legal reforms have addressed many concerns raised by HRW. There is nothing to lose and possibly considerable gain from direct dialogue with NGO representatives visiting India.

Cooperation with the ICRC provides additional benefits. Granting the Red Cross access to Kashmiri prisons, makes it more likely that the ICRC will be allowed to obtain comparable access to visit Indian personnel held by terrorists. In addition, the ICRC has provided valuable training for security forces at no cost to the government. False pride should not prevent India from accepting such useful assistance to educating security forces in humanitarian law and the Geneva conventions. Cooperation with the UN and other respected NGOs can similarly demonstrate to the world and Indian citizens that the government respects human rights.

International cooperation is also good for business. Media pictures of torture victims and political instability repel Western corporations interested in trade and investment. U.S. legislation restricts American economic relations with countries that commit gross violations of human rights.

Main Menu / Back to Model Answer Page