[Reader-list] Human life remains as cheap as a bullet

[asit das]

Tehelka - India's Independent Weekly News
Magazine<http://www.tehelka.com/story_main51.asp?filename=Ws110112Human.asp>


**

    [image: Suhas Chakma]

Human life remains as cheap as a bullet

*Suhas Chakma* wonders if the Indian security forces know the law of the
land

Illustration: Tim Tim Rose
  ------------------------------



    **<http://www.tehelka.com/story_main51.asp?filename=Ws020112Kashmir.asp>
**<http://www.tehelka.com/story_main51.asp?filename=Ws030112Jammu_Kashmir.asp>
  ------------------------------

*EACH YEAR* law enforcement personnel violate the right to life of many
citizens of India. The killing of Altaf Ahmad Sood, a class 12 student last
week at the NHPC premises in Baramulla district of Jammu and Kashmir in the
firing by the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) personnel is just
one of the many examples that expose the illegal orders of CISF Directorate
on the use of firearms to protect the installations. Altaf Ahmad was part
of a mob of 400 villagers who took to the streets and later gathered near a
local power station to protest long hours of power outages.

On September 30, 2011, CISF DIG Shikha Goel reportedly issued a circular
stating that the CISF Directorate had noted that some units were ‘failing
to take proactive action’ in protecting and securing the undertakings and
that the CISF personnel should protect the installations against mob
violence, particularly where there is a delay in arrival of the local
police or the magistrate. The CISF circular is blatantly illegal. Section
129 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) says if protesters of an unlawful
assembly do not disperse, they, if necessary, are to be arrested and
confined. If it is not possible to disperse, the law enforcement personnel
should use ‘as little force, and as little injury to person and property,
as may be consistent with dispersing the assembly and arresting and
detaining such persons,’ with the authorisation of the magistrate.

But generally this is not the case. In clear violation of the CrPC, the
first thing security personnel do is use lethal weapons while dealing with
protests. In most cases, they shoot without authorisation of a magistrate.
Even when they are given permission, they usually shoot above the waist to
cause maximum damage, including loss of life or impairment for life. The
Indian practice is in sharp contrast to British laws, which require bullets
to be fired on the ground so that they would bounce up and hit the legs of
demonstrators. In 1989, the British government replaced rubber bullets with
plastic ones to deal with the protesters in Northern Ireland as the rubber
bullets were more injurious.

The statistics on the disproportionate use of firearms by law enforcement
personnel is alarming in India. As per the National Crime Records Bureau,
1,462 civilians were killed in police firing in the past five years. In
2010 alone, nearly 51 per cent of all police firing cases were linked to
riot control.

The patterns of firearms use by security forces in India do not match
United Nations standards. Rule 9 of the United Nations’ Basic Principles on
the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials of 1990 states:
“Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in
self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or
serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime
involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger
and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only
when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives. In
any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when
strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.” Further, Article 3(c) of
the United Nations’ Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials says the
“use of firearms is considered an extreme measure. Every effort should be
made to exclude the its use, especially against children.”

*HUMAN LIFE* is too precious to be taken away by trigger-happy law
enforcement personnel. The governments that are concerned about the right
to life of their citizens, have been using rubber and plastic bullets to
reduce death and serious injuries. South Africa is using rubber bullets
since 1960s.

Ironically, the use of rubber bullets is an exception while the use of live
bullets is the norm in India. The state governments usually order inquiries
to placate the situation once protesters are killed. However, the use of
force is often justified on the ground of mob violence. Since it is
impossible to prove the misuse of firearms in case of violent protest, the
inquiries often end up in exonerating the police personnel even if they
simply aim to kill. If India is committed to ensure the right to life of
its citizens, it must make it mandatory to use plastic-coated bullets to
control protests. After the Himachal Pradesh High Court disapproved the use
of live bullets to tackle monkey menace last year, the state started using
rubber bullets. There is no reason why the guarantee to ensure the right to
life of monkeys cannot be extended to humans.

*Suhas Chakma is director of the Asian Centre for Human Rights.*
suhaschakma at achrweb.org