[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 46 (Monday, March 13, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E581]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E581]]
        HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN INDIA; THE CASE OF S.S. MANN

                                 ______


                            HON. DAN BURTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, March 13, 1995
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the 
serious human rights problems in India--especially in Punjab and 
Kashmir. I would like to focus today on the case of Sikh leader 
Simranjit Singh Mann--a former Member of Parliament. He has been held 
in an Indian prison for over 2 months now for the simple act of making 
a speech.
  Mr. Mann was arrested after making a speech December 26 in Punjab, 
Khalistan, in front of a crowd of 50,000 Sikhs. At that time, he called 
for a peaceful, democratic, nonviolent movement to liberate Khalistan. 
Major Sikh political groups called for an independent Khalistan in 
October 1987. In his speech, Mr. Mann asked those attending to raise 
their hands if they agreed with him that a peaceful movement for a free 
and independent Khalistan is necessary. Every hand was raised.
  Mr. Mann is being held without trial or formal charges under India's 
brutal Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act. This oppressive law has 
been universally condemned by human rights groups around the world. It 
allows the Government to detain virtually anyone in prison for nearly 2 
years without filing charges or going to court. Sikhs and Moslems 
detained under this law are routinely tortured and often murdered. How 
can a country which proclaims itself the world's largest democracy 
behave in such a manner?
  On January 12, I, along with 25 of my colleagues wrote to the Prime 
Minister of India, P.V. Narasimha Rao, to demand Mr. Mann's release. 
The letter was signed by prominent members of both parties, Republicans 
and Democrats. While we disagree on many things, we all agree that 
everyone around the world is entitled to certain basic human rights--
freedom from torture and other violent abuses, dignity, and self-
determination.
  India's response to our letter was extremely disappointing. Instead 
of doing the right thing and releasing Mr. Mann, the Government of 
India dug up old charges against him from 1985--charges long ago 
discredited--and added them to the charges against Mr. Mann.
  India's harassment of Sikh leaders, and its revival of old trumped-up 
charges against Mr. Mann demonstrate India's fear of the potency of the 
movement for an independent Khaslistan. The fact that only 4 percent of 
Sikhs in Punjab participated in State elections organized by the 
Government in New Delhi in 1992 is a further indication of the Indian 
Government's weakness in that region. What India must understand is 
that, if a people are determined to be free, it cannot hold them at the 
point of a gun forever. India has over a half-a-million armed forces in 
Punjab to force its will on the Sikh people. It cannot sustain this 
heavy military presence forever. The army rules in Punjab with a 
ruthlessness and brutality that we in this country have a hard time 
understanding. However, every murder, act of torture, or rape committed 
by India's Army or paralegal forces will only increase the animosity 
between these two peoples.
  Mr. Mann is the most visible spokesman for the freedom of Khalistan 
in Punjab. The Government's intimidation of Mr. Mann and other peaceful 
advocates must not be met with silence by the world's leaders. As long 
as India continues to practice this kind of repression, the other 
governments of the world must speak out and protest. A country which 
practices systematic repression should not receive aid from free 
countries like ours. The United States must not support tyranny.
  The release of S.S. Mann would be a good first step by the Indian 
Government to demonstrate its commitment to democratic principles. I 
call for Mr. Mann's immediate release, and I call upon the First Lady, 
who will be traveling to India at the end of the month, to raise the 
issue of human rights with the Prime Minister.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record at this 
point an article from the January 19 issue of the Indian Express of 
Chandigarh about our letter to the Prime Minister calling for Mr. 
Mann's release.
          [From the Indian Express Chandigarh, Jan. 19, 1995]

        Twenty-six Congressmen Protest to Rao Over Mann's Arrest

       Washington.--Influential members of the new Republican-
     controlled Congress have fired their first anti-India salvo 
     on urgings from the pro-Khalistan lobby.
       Hardly two weeks in the session, the Congress has seen a 
     bipartisan group of 6 lawmakers write to the Prime Minister, 
     Mr. P.V. Narasimha Rao, protesting the detention of Sikh 
     leader Simranjit Singh Mann.
       The group has also called for the repeal of the Terrorist 
     and Disruptive Activities (prevention) Act (TADA). The letter 
     was written on the urging of the Council of Khalistan, the 
     leading pro-Khalistani lobby in the US headed by Dr. Gurmit 
     Singh Aulakh.
       Influence: Although it was initiated by the usual coterie 
     of India-bashers led by New Delhi's most acerbic critic on 
     Capitol Hill, the Republican, Mr. Dan Burton, the difference 
     this time around is that many of them now hold leadership 
     positions and wield considerable influence.
       Mr. Burton himself is now a senior member of the House 
     International Relations Committee. Other Republicans who had 
     signed the letter are Mr. Gerald Solomon, the chairman of the 
     Rules Committee, Mr. Phil Crane, the head of the Trade Sub-
     committee of the powerful Ways and Means Committee and Mr. 
     Tom Bliley, chairman of the Commerce Committee.
       Thus, while Mr. Solomon could allow anti-India legislation 
     and resolutions to the floor of the House for debate, Mr. 
     Bliley and Mr. Crane could put a damper on the burgeoning 
     Indo-US commerce and trade relations by calling for punitive 
     action against India on trade matters and keep pushing for 
     laws such as Super 301 and Special 301.
       Mann's Arrest: In their letter to Mr. Rao, the legislators 
     said that ``we find it very troubling that a leader of Mr. 
     Mann's stature can be arrested for exercising his freedom of 
     speech.''
       The legislators said that they had been informed by Dr. 
     Aulakh, that Mr. Mann, a former Member of Parliament and 
     senior leader of the Shiromani Akali Dal party, was arrested 
     on January 5 for ``having advocated independence for 
     Khalistan by peaceful means.''
       They noted that Mr. Mann had urged a rally of 50,000 people 
     to show their support for ``a peaceful movement toward an 
     independent state by raising their hands, and that the entire 
     crowd did so.''
       The legislators wrote that they were concerned that this 
     was not the first time Mr. Mann had been arrested under TADA, 
     and noted that he spent five years in prison during the 1980s 
     ``without trial and without formal charges being filed 
     against him in a court of law.''
       The lawmakers noted that according to press reports, ``he 
     was subject to physical and psychological torture during that 
     period--including electric shock and having his beard pulled 
     out in tufts.''
       Misuse of TADA: In January 1994, Mr. Mann was again 
     arrested under TADA, and over 50 charges filed against him 
     ``were later dropped and he was released,'' they said. The 
     legislators wrote to Mr. Rao that ``it appears that the 
     Indian government is using [the] TADA to harass and 
     intimidate Mr. Mann.''
       The legislators also called on the Prime Minister ``to 
     recommend to your Parliament that (the) TADA be reformed to 
     bring it into compliance with generally accepted human 
     rights.
     

                          ____________________