[Reader-list] Salwa judum ‘atrocities’: Apex court seeks report

[Nazneen Anand Shamsi]

Dear all,

I was wondering about an observation made by our Honorable Supreme Court, 'When
somebody is given arms he is bound to commit crime. It is a serious offence.
Who is responsible for it ?'. Could somebody please help me with these
concepts viz- person-arms-crime-responsibility. From the perspective of
ethics and morality. Can a crime against a person be ever justified, except
in case of self defense? Under what framework, can a procedure of
accountability be established? Even if it is consensually derived, is it
just or right? Who decides who to hold accountable?

Best

Nazo

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


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Salwa_judum_atrocities_Apex_court_seeks_report__/articleshow/3504809.cms

Economic Times


NEW DELHI: Expressing concern over the National Human Rights Commission's
(NHRC) report over the "atrocities" committed by the counter-naxalite salwa
judum movement in Chhattisgarh, the Supreme
Court<http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Salwa_judum_atrocities_Apex_court_seeks_report__/articleshow/3504809.cms#>on
Friday asked the state government to come up with its stand on the
remedial measures. The court asked the government to file its response
before elections in the state schedule to be held later this year.

A bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justice P Sathasivam and
Justice J M Panchal said: "Part I of the report (filed by NHRC) speaks of
various atrocities committed by salwa judum." "When somebody is given arms
he is bound to commit crime. It is a serious offence. Who is responsible for
it" ? asked Justice Balakrishnan speaking for the bench.

Perusing parts of the exhaustive report of NHRC, the court said, "Salwa
judum has committed serious offences. The people are subjected to serious
problems".

Further, the NHRC report has recommended remedial measures to be taken by
the state government, said Justice Balakrishnan.

The court asked the state government to detail the remedial measures it has
taken while posting the matter for further hearing on October 23.

Senior counsel K K Venugopal appearing for state said that the government
will submits its objections to the NHRC report. When another senior counsel
Ranjit Kumar appearing in the case sought more time saying that the
elections in the state were scheduled to be held around November, the court
said, "It has nothing to do with elections".

Earlier, the court had asked the NHRC to probe the allegations of human
rights violations by the salwa judum (Peace Mission) in the state in
response to the petitions filed by noted sociologist Nandini Sundar,
historian Ramachandra Guha, E A S Sarma and activist Kartam Joga challenging
the setting up of salwa judum.

The petitioners had alleged that in the guise of countering the naxal
movement, the salwa judum was indulging in killings and committing
atrocities against tribals. They had sought a direction to the state
government to refrain from "supporting and encouraging" the salwa judum.

The government, however, had said that naxal menace in the state has reached
alarming proportions and it cannot stifle any people's initiative in the
form of salwa judum movement to combat the violent illegal activities of the
ultras. Centre also had backed the state government's stand on the issue.