Licence to kill and torture
By Rahul Singh
ONE of the major threats facing India — Pakistan as well — is terrorism. The only way this can be tackled effectively is by a disciplined, efficient and honest police force.
The trouble with the Indian police force is that it has none of these essential qualities, though it has some outstanding officers at the top.
The page one lead story in the Nov 14 issue of The Indian Express, one of India’s leading dailies and among the most respected, is how 70 Muslim men were picked up by the police in Hyderabad, the capital city of the south Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, after two terror attacks last year in which over 50 people were killed.
At least 15 of the arrested men were continuously tortured in various ways for six to nine months, while in custody. They were given electric shocks, physically beaten and some had their beards plucked out. The state government has now admitted that they were innocent and given them a ‘rehabilitation package’ of between Rs30,000 to Rs80,000 as a ‘healing touch’ to enable them to buy auto-rickshaws.
This compensation, if it can be called that, only came about because these men had complained to the state Minority Finance Commission that they were unable to get jobs, due to the stigma of them having been jailed. The state Minority Commission had also looked into the matter and prepared a report, detailing the torture.
In any civilised country, not only would the compensation have been far higher but exemplary action taken against the policemen responsible. Not in India, however. The most that can be expected is for the guilty policemen to be transferred or suspended, not even dismissed from service.
The only positive thing to have emerged from this sorry business is that at least the innocent men were released from prison and a commission was able to take up their case. That says something for Indian democracy, though perhaps not for the quality of justice meted out. However, it is neither democracy nor justice that concerns me so much in this particular column, as the police, despite all three being closely linked.
At one time, indeed for quite a few years after Indian independence, the Indian police had a fairly good reputation. The Bombay police, for instance, prided themselves on being the second best in the world — after Britain’s Scotland Yard. And it was not an idle boast.
The rot started to set in when politicians began to use the police for their own purposes, thereby politicising the force. Growing corruption all round, including in the police, also contributed to the decline. It is well known that money has to be paid to get into the police at the lower levels and that this money percolates up to officials and politicians. Police postings also come at a premium, the amount depending on how lucrative a particular area is for illegal activities such as bootlegging, prostitution and narcotics.
Another factor contributing to the decline was the slow and often faulty delivery of justice. The Indian public became more tolerant of third-degree methods used by the police to extract confessions. Beatings and torture in police stations became a common practice. Vigilantes, like the Hindu chauvinist Shiv Sena, also entered the scene, with their own speedier form of justice, bypassing the usual — and much slower — law and order system.
Then came the onset of terrorism, first in Punjab, then Kashmir, now all over the country. The police were virtually given carte blanche in Punjab to tackle this new threat and they became an extra-constitutional power in their own right.
I was then the editor of The Indian Express in Chandigarh, the Punjab capital. I recall vividly the then Punjab home secretary (the police came under him), N.N. Vohra (he is now governor of Jammu and Kashmir), telling me how his car had been stopped by the police at a checkpost and his driver was asked for money. When he refused to pay up, they beat him up, even though he told them that he was the home secretary’s driver.
I was stunned to hear this. “Can’t you take action against them?” I asked Vohra. His reply was just as stunning: “They will probably say that they had found drugs in the car.”
In other words, the police were able to blackmail their own boss.
Terrorism was also behind another controversial incident that took place in a crowded, largely Muslim locality in New Delhi only a short while ago. The Delhi police claim they got a tip-off that some terrorists who had been behind recent bomb blasts in several cities were in a particular apartment.
They stormed the place, killing two of the alleged terrorists (both Muslims) but somehow another two of their colleagues managed to escape even though the apartment was surrounded by several policemen. A police inspector was killed in the shoot-out.
The official version of his killing, however, did not tally with TV coverage of the incident, which seemed to indicate that he had been shot by his own police force, in other words by what is termed in military parlance as friendly fire. As the controversy snowballed, the prime minister declared that there would be no inquiry into the episode, leaving many people wondering if this was a cover-up to save face. So much for the bad news. The good news is that at the higher levels, there have been some outstanding police officers. Julio Ribeiro, a Roman Catholic from Mumbai is one of them. He was inducted into Punjab from Mumbai, where he had been the police commissioner and had successfully taken on the underworld. In Punjab, he put the terrorists on the back foot with his ‘bullet for bullet’ policy.
Two attempts were made on his life by Sikh terrorists, one in distant Romania where he had been sent as an envoy for his own safety. Though shot, he survived both attempts and now, in retirement, has become an activist in Mumbai’s affairs.
He is one of my heroes. The Indian police needs more Ribeiros.
The writer is a former Editor of Reader’s Digest and The Indian Express.
singh.84@hotmail.com


Gulf war illness
By Richard Norton-Taylor
US scientists announced on Monday a breakthrough in the long search for an explanation of Gulf war syndrome, the debilitating illness which has affected thousands of British and American veterans.
For the first time they named the two foremost causes of what is now called “Gulf war illness”, both of them neurotoxins. The use of nerve agent protection pills containing the active ingredient pyridostigmine bromide, combined with exposure to pesticides, were “strongly and consistently” linked to the illness, said scientists.
The findings, which were enthusiastically welcomed in the UK by the Royal British Legion and will lead to pressure on the country’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) to recognise the illness, were made by the US Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses and presented on Monday to James Peake, the US veterans affairs secretary.
By pointing to the two neurotoxins as the main cause of Gulf war illness, they played down the significance of other factors widely blamed for the symptoms, including depleted uranium, anthrax vaccines, fuels, solvents, and sand.
The researchers added that Gulf war illness “fundamentally differs from trauma and stress-related syndromes described after other wars”.
The illness has a number of symptoms, including persistent memory and concentration problems, chronic headaches, and widespread pain. The condition is estimated to affect more than 170,000 US, and more than 12,000 British veterans of the 1991 Gulf war.
Sue Freeth, the Royal British Legion’s director of welfare, who described the US report as a great stride forward, said: “For veterans, some of the mystery behind what has caused their conditions is over. For years veterans have been told that their illnesses are psychological. This report concludes this is not the case, but the result of exposures to very specific and harmful toxins while serving in the Gulf.” She added: “The UK government must not delay any further. It should build on these results and immediately cooperate with the US to find ways of treating these lamentable conditions.”
Marshal of the RAF, Lord Craig, who was the UK’s chief of defence staff during the Gulf war, said the landmark American report should lead to improved research and treatment in the UK. “Recognition of the full extent of the illnesses suffered by these veterans of the conflict, and the obligation owed to them, is long overdue,” he said.
The MoD said: “The Medical Research Council’s 2003 report on Gulf veterans’ concluded that there is no evidence from UK or international research for a single syndrome related specifically to service in the Gulf.” It added that any veteran in the UK who suffers from ill-health as a result of their service is compensated through the war pensions and armed forces occupational pension scheme.
— The Guardian, London


