[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 18]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 24865-24866]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH DEMANDS FULL ACCOUNTING FOR SECRET CREMATIONS IN 
                                 PUNJAB

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, November 3, 2005

  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, on November 1, Human Rights Watch wrote an 
excellent letter to the National Human Rights Commission of India 
demanding full accounting for the secret cremations of Sikhs in India. 
The secret cremations were described by India's Supreme Court as 
``flagrant violation of human rights on a mass scale.'' The court 
ordered the Indian government in November 1995, two months after the 
``disappearance'' of Jaswant Singh Khalra, to conduct a full 
investigation into this brutal policy. Ten years later, that 
investigation has never taken place. Instead, the commission has chosen 
to focus on the trivial issue of whether the cremations were conducted 
in accord with the police rules, a terrible diversion from the real 
issue, which is that the Indian government is carrying out this 
genocidal policy against the Sikh minority.
  This investigation must proceed, and it must be a full-fledged 
inquiry into this murderous policy, India must make full restitution to 
the victims' families.
  Mr. Speaker, I will be inserting the letter from Human Rights Watch 
into the Record at this time.

                                                 November 1, 2005.
     Re mass secret cremations in Punjab.

     Hon. Dr. Justice A.S. Anand,
     Chairperson, National Human Rights Commission, Faridkot 
         House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi, India.
       Dear Justice Anand: As the National Human Rights Commission 
     prepares to issue a decision in the Punjab mass secret 
     cremations case, we urge the Commission to order a full 
     accounting of the systematic abuses that occurred in Punjab, 
     determine liability after detailed investigations into the 
     violations, and provide for compensation for surviving family 
     members based on a detailed understanding of the scope of 
     violations suffered by each individual.
       In 1994, investigations by human rights activist Jaswant 
     Singh Khalra revealed that security forces had abducted, 
     extrajudicially executed, and secretly cremated thousands of 
     Sikhs in Punjab from 1984 to 1994. Mr. Khalra exposed over 
     2,000 secret cremations in Amritsar district alone--one of 17 
     districts in Punjab. Subsequent investigations by human 
     rights groups confirmed that secret cremations had occurred 
     throughout the state, and that cremation was only one form of 
     disposing of victims' bodies. After publicly disclosing his 
     findings, Mr. Khalra was abducted by the Punjab police and 
     ``disappeared'' in September 1995. In November 1995, the 
     Supreme Court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation 
     (CBI) to inquire into his abduction and allegations of mass 
     cremations.
       On December 12, 1996, the Indian Supreme Court found the 
     inquiry by the CBI into mass cremations in Punjab disclosed a 
     ``flagrant violation of human rights on a mass scale'' and 
     ordered the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to 
     adjudicate these mass crimes and ``determine all the issues'' 
     (Paramjit Kaur v. State of Punjab). After challenges by the 
     Indian government, the NHRC limited its investigation to 
     illegal cremations in Amritsar district alone. The NHRC has 
     now received 3,500 claims of illegal cremation in Amritsar.
       Instead of investigating these secret cremations as 
     unlawful deprivations of life, the Commission has adopted the 
     narrow issue of whether the victims' bodies were cremated 
     according to police rules. At two hearings in October 2005, 
     the petitioner Committee for Information and Initiative on 
     Punjab (CIIP) challenged the Commission's decision to discard 
     investigations, especially given the failure to identify the 
     vast majority of victims and establish procedures, standards 
     and mechanisms to adjudicate these cases to capture the full 
     scope of human rights violations.
       In almost nine years, the Commission has not heard 
     testimony in a single case, or held a single security 
     official or agency responsible for human rights violations. 
     Further, at hearings in recent months, the Commission has 
     indicated its intention to dispense with investigations into 
     the violations altogether, and only determine whether the 
     cremations occurred according to police procedure. This is an 
     odd decision for a human rights body.
       Human Rights Watch strongly urges the Commission to commit 
     itself to detailed investigations into the rights violations 
     suffered by all victims of illegal cremations and their 
     family members, including whether individual deaths were 
     unlawful, the role of state security forces or their agents 
     in planning or carrying out illegal killings, identifying 
     individual perpetrators, and determining proper compensation. 
     It is critical that those cases not addressed by the NHRC's 
     order of November 2004 are also investigated. Until the facts 
     are determined, ``disappearances'' remain an ongoing crime 
     and the NHRC ruling does not close the case.
       Such investigations are required by international human 
     rights law. The International Covenant on Civil and Political 
     Rights, which India ratified in 1979, provides in article 2 
     that a victim of a rights violation shall have an effective 
     remedy and that the right to such a remedy be determined by a 
     competent authority and be enforced when granted. A victim's 
     right to an effective remedy imposes an obligation on the 
     state to undertake investigations to identify the 
     perpetrators of human rights violations. Indeed, the 
     Commission's August 1997 order concluded that the Commission 
     must lay the factual foundations of the case in order to 
     establish liability, but for reasons that are not clear the 
     Commission has never implemented its own order. Anything less 
     than proper investigations will be a betrayal of victims and 
     their families.
       We note that in the nine years since the Commission took 
     cognizance of the Punjab

[[Page 24866]]

     mass cremations matter, it has investigated and resolved 
     numerous other complaints of human rights violations 
     throughout India. Moreover, the Commission has pursued cases 
     suo motu, without even receiving a complaint, after 
     violations came to its attention through media reports. The 
     NHRC has earned a well-deserved reputation for taking on 
     powerful forces in India, which makes the Commission's 
     decisions in the Punjab cases even more puzzling.
       In this upcoming order, we also urge the Commission to 
     clarify that the November 2004 order of compensation is 
     interim. This order announced a total award of 2.5 lakhs 
     rupees (around U.S. $5,500) to 109 families in whose cases 
     police admitted custody of next of kin, without determining 
     individual responsibility, providing other reparatory 
     measures, or engaging in an inquiry into the facts as 
     directed by the Supreme Court. This grant of compensation is 
     not only paltry, but it does not fulfill the Commission's 
     responsibilities under international human rights law to make 
     an individual determination.
       Developing a compensation policy requires extensive 
     investigation to clarify the extent of human rights 
     violations, the potential beneficiaries, and the nature of 
     injuries suffered, among other issues. The expert report 
     submitted at the hearing on October 24, 2005 by Physicians 
     for Human Rights (PHR) and the Bellevue/NYU Program for 
     Survivors of Torture (Bellevue), demonstrates that the 
     deprivation of life occurred within a pattern of violations 
     that included intentional abuse among multiple family members 
     of the ``disappeared.'' The CIIP further called on the 
     Commission to summon the authors of the report to testify. 
     This report should compel the Commission to investigate the 
     deprivation of the right to life of the victim, and the 
     physical and psychological trauma inflicted upon surviving 
     family members. In addition, our brief, submitted to the 
     Commission in December 2003 in conjunction with Harvard Law 
     Student Advocates for Human Rights, demonstrates that human 
     rights bodies have considered evidence from numerous sources 
     to adjudicate ``disappearances'' and extrajudicial 
     executions, including evidence from international human 
     rights experts. In its upcoming order, we urge the Commission 
     to admit and fully weigh all evidence available, including 
     the PHR/Bellevue report.
       To demonstrate its intention to fulfill the mandate of the 
     Supreme Court, the Commission must act to redress the 
     violations of the rights to life and liberty suffered by 
     thousands of families in Punjab. Its failure to do so is 
     contributing to impunity, sending the message that 
     perpetrators of mass crimes are more powerful than the 
     Supreme Court and National Human Rights Commission. The 
     Commission, no doubt, is aware that the prosecution of the 
     officials who ``disappeared'' Jaswant Singh Khalra, the human 
     rights defender who exposed the mass cremations in Punjab, 
     has not concluded in nine years. The Commission should not 
     allow the Punjab mass cremations case to also stand as an 
     example of the triumph of impunity over the right to justice.
       Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to a 
     fruitful dialogue with you and other members of the 
     Commission on this case.
           Sincerely,

                                                   Brad Adams,

                                Executive Director, Asia Division,
     Human Rights Watch.

                          ____________________