Skip to Content

Share

Impunity in India

By
February 1, 2013

Major Avtar Singh of the Indian Army’s counterinsurgency in Kashmir killed dozens. India refused to punish him. So did Canada and the U.S., where he killed his family and committed suicide.

https://www.guernicamag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/guernica-kashmir2.jpeg
Image from Flickr via Austin Yoder

On Saturday June 9, 2012, Major Avtar Singh, formerly of the Indian Army and living in Selma, California, shot his wife and three children. Before turning the gun on himself, he called the Sheriff’s office and told them that he had killed four people. The SWAT team that responded to the call found his youngest and oldest sons, ages three and seventeen, and his wife, dead of gunshot wounds to the head; the middle son, fifteen years old, was critically injured, but alive. He died a few days later, from wounds to the head.

The execution-style gunshots to the head were identical to those which killed Major Singh’s most famous victim, the Kashmiri human rights lawyer Jalil Andrabi. Andrabi was abducted, tortured and murdered in 1996 for exposing abuses carried out by the Indian Army in Kashmir. Major Avtar Singh was also wanted by Kashmir’s courts and Interpol for the murder of twenty-eight people in Kashmir in the course of his career as an officer in 35 Rashtriya Rifles, a counterinsurgency unit of the Indian Army. The story of his crimes and the manner in which he evaded justice for sixteen years is a grim chronicle of Indian crimes against humanity in Kashmir and of the silence of the international community which has abetted these. The impunity exploited by India and enabled by the international community clearly corrupted Singh’s conscience, to judge by the murder of his family and his subsequent suicide. Until it deals with the gross human rights violations in Kashmir and an impunity that harkens back to its colonial past, India’s proud claims as the world’s most populous democracy are fatally tainted.

The Death of a Lawyer

Jalil Andrabi was a Kashmiri human rights lawyer who dared to challenge the army in the early 1990s as Indian forces fought a pro-independence insurgency. Indian counterinsurgency in Kashmir unfolded as a classic dirty war, where the army regarded the civilian population as the enemy. Widespread abuses by the armed forces—extrajudicial killings, torture, rape, disappearances, firing on unarmed protestors, arson, looting, destruction of houses and crops—were intended to break down popular support for independence. Andrabi founded the Kashmir Commission of Jurists to uphold basic human rights through legal action, and filed thousands of habeas corpus petitions on behalf of detained Kashmiris. Representing prisoners in court, Andrabi won rulings to prevent the army from carrying out torture and extrajudicial executions, or from transferring Kashmiri prisoners to jails outside the state where they would be cut off from family and legal support. He was also outspokenly committed to Kashmiri independence. Before organizations like Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists, and Amnesty International, he meticulously detailed a saga of official abuse, and was, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “a frequent caller at diplomatic missions in New Delhi, the U.N. Human Rights Commission, and the U.S. State Department.” In 1995, he traveled to Geneva to address the UN Human Rights Commission; he was due to do so again in 1996. In a speech in Delhi a few weeks before his murder in February that year, he describes the situation in Kashmir: “The enormity and the level of atrocities being committed on the people of Kashmir for the last more than six years [sic]” he said, “has been such that it amounts to the abuse of sovereignty… According to some estimates more than 40,000 people have been killed, which include all—old, men and children, women, sick and infirm. The youth of Kashmir have been mowed down. They are tortured in torture cells and… thousands of youth have been killed in police custody. These atrocities being committed on the people of Kashmir are not mere aberrations. These are part of deliberate and systematic state policy… aimed to silence the people of Kashmir into subjugation.”

Andrabi went on to describe the absolute powers given to the Indian military by laws like the Armed Forces (J&K) Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and J&K Disturbed Areas Act. Based directly on colonial legislation used by the British to suppress the Indian movement for independence, these laws gave the armed forces a summary power to shoot to kill—with impunity from prosecution—those accused of human rights violations. The AFSPA, copied from the Armed Forces Special Powers Ordinance of 1942, was adopted by the Indian parliament in 1958. It was promulgated first in Nagaland in the northeast. Like Kashmir, Nagaland was inhabited by ethnic and religious minorities campaigning for independence after the British left the subcontinent. Again like Kashmir, the Indian response to Naga lobbying for self-determination was itself copied directly from colonial models of British counterinsurgency in Malaya, Burma, and Palestine.

[Andrabi] ended with a quote from Human Rights Watch that would make the impunity starkly clear: “The government of India has never made public any action it has taken to investigate these killings and prosecute those responsible.”

In a picture his brother Arshad had blown up for showing to the media, Andrabi has thick eyebrows that arch above sympathetic, slightly mournful eyes. His gaze reads as stubborn, unflagging. Dressed in a gray suit with wide lapels and a slate gray v-neck sweater, he wears a beard that is tightly shaved along with hair moderately trimmed. Anything but effusive, he stares directly at the camera, his mouth almost taciturn, his brow tentative, furrowed. Given the community he worked within, Andrabi witnessed his own friends and colleagues—lawyers and journalists committed to ending the abuses—under constant attack. Arundhati Roy has called Kashmir “the most highly militarized zone in the world.” In April 1995, two unidentified gunmen opened fire on Mian Abdul Qayoom, President of the J&K Bar Association, leaving him seriously injured. In October, High Court Advocate A.Q. Sailani was killed by “unidentified gunmen” a few yards from an army bunker in Srinagar. In his own final public speech, Andrabi memorialized them and others, invoking their names, the dates they were taken. Describing in detail the shots fired, the extrajudicial killings, the disappearances, often the last breaths of these friends, which family members saw them and where, he ended with a quote from Human Rights Watch that would make the impunity starkly clear: “The government of India has never made public any action it has taken to investigate these killings and prosecute those responsible.”

The killing of Jalil Andrabi was staged as a public spectacle. For three days, the neighborhood of Peer Bagh was surrounded by military vehicles and cordoned off; anyone entering or leaving was stopped and questioned. Andrabi’s brothers, who resemble him closely, were stopped this way. On March 8, 1996, the car in which Andrabi and his wife, Rifat, were traveling was waved to stop, and he was taken by soldiers. Rifat pleaded with the head officer to release her husband, but he refused. She could not drive, so, as the convoy sped off, she found an auto-rickshaw (a makeshift motor scooter with passenger seats and an awning, the staple of public transport in the subcontinent) to follow them. The trucks were much faster than the auto; she could not keep up with the convoy.

The same evening Rifat attempted to file a First Incident Report (FIR) naming the army personnel responsible for the abduction at the local police station in Sadar, but she was refused. An Amnesty International report records interference from the police, army, and central government to keep the army from being mentioned in connection with the abduction: “The Inspector General of Police reportedly reassured Rifat Andrabi on the phone later at night that Andrabi was ‘with them’ and would be released after the completion of investigations. On the following morning, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court Bar Association, of which Andrabi was a member, filed a habeas corpus petition in the High Court, which then directed all the law enforcement agencies in the state to declare whether they were holding Andrabi. In a sworn affidavit presented on 11 March, the army stated before the High Court that ‘Rashtriya Rifles do not operate in the said area, neither was any member deputed/present at Parayapora at 5:30 p.m. nor did any member of Rashtriya Rifles apprehend or receive the alleged detinue on the date and time given.’” The Amnesty report indicates that police “urged the family to alter their FIR so as not to mention suspected army involvement but to declare instead that Andrabi had been taken away by unknown persons.” Rifat and her family reluctantly agreed as they were apparently told that if they did so, they could meet Andrabi. “On 13 March,” the report continues, “the FIR was finally registered but the family was not informed of Andrabi’s whereabouts.” As the report makes clear, the High Court was unable to enforce the habeas petition to compel the army and police to produce Andrabi in court. The writ of habeas corpus has been the foundation for the protection of individual liberty and rights from arbitrary state action; effectively, it does not apply in Kashmir. Ten years after the murder of Andrabi, Human Rights Watch cites Kashmiri human rights activists who estimate that there are 60,000 pending habeas petitions in Indian-administered Kashmir.

Given the deep mythic significance of India’s rivers in the Hindu tradition, this defilement is especially telling. ‘The largest democracy in the world’ has polluted its sacred waters with the bodies of its tortured citizens,” said Mahmood.

Weeks later, on March 27th, Andrabi’s body was found in the mud on the banks of the Jhelum, the river that runs through Srinagar. The post-mortem report records evidence of torture: wounds to the head and body, facial bones broken, eyes torn out, skin all over the body loose and peeling, gunshot wounds to the head which finally caused death. Dumping bodies into rivers is a favored method used by the armed forces to dispose of those who die under torture. Srinagar residents who live near the Jhelum are accustomed to finding bodies and body parts in the river and on its banks. Cynthia Mahmood, an anthropologist at the University of Notre Dame has witnessed and experienced the practice of state terror and the violent silencing of dissent. Mahmood is not Indian, but was attacked and gang-raped in India for writing about abuses against the Sikhs in the 1980s, in the course of counterinsurgency operations. She recounts: “In Muzaffarabad, on the Pakistani or ‘free’ side of Kashmir, a blackboard by the banks of the Jhelum River keeps count as Kashmiri bodies float down from across the borders. (When I visited in January 1997, the grim chalk tally then was at 476). Given the deep mythic significance of India’s rivers in the Hindu tradition, this defilement is especially telling. ‘The largest democracy in the world’ has polluted its sacred waters with the bodies of its tortured citizens.”

Andrabi was one of the leading citizens of Srinagar, and his killing was meant as a warning that no one was safe from the army. Protests in Kashmir against the killing, led by Andrabi’s colleagues at the Srinagar High Court Bar Association, and international outrage resulted in an investigation. The High Court ordered the creation of a police Special Investigation Team (SIT). The team’s report identified Major Singh of the 35 Rashtriya Rifles as perpetrator. The Court’s proceedings over the next eleven years record its futile attempts to force the police or the army to produce Major Singh in court to stand trial for Andrabi’s and twenty-eight others’ murders while he was posted in Kashmir in the early- to mid-1990s. The Court went so far as to hold the members of the SIT in contempt for failing to bring Singh to trial, thereby flouting the law and fostering impunity. The army’s response to repeated requests from the High Court was to claim that it was unaware of his whereabouts, that he had acted in an individual capacity, or that he was “absconding.”

While the army, which continued to pay his pension, claimed that it was unable to find Major Singh, a reporter for The Indian Express was able to track him down in Ludhiana in 1998 and interview him. In the interview, which has been discussed but never publicly published, Singh claimed he was being made a scapegoat by the government. In 2004, the army informed the Court that it intended to court-martial Singh, rather than produce him in court to answer the charges against him. The court-martial never happened. The High Court had ordered the government and police in 1997 to impound Singh’s passport and watch all airports, ports, and railway stations to prevent him from leaving the country. In 2006, however, he was discovered to have fled to Canada, seeking asylum there on the grounds that the Indian government was trying to frame him for the murder. The Canadian government asked Interpol for information regarding the murder charges against him, and this request was relayed by way of local police to the court at Budgam.

Groups like the Canadian Center for International Justice and Amnesty International tried to persuade the Canadian government to fulfill its legal obligations as a member of the International Criminal Court to try Singh for crimes against humanity. Despite a thorough investigation in 2007 by the War Crimes Unit of the Canadian Department of Justice, no prosecution was initiated. Singh’s asylum application was denied, and that was deemed by Canadian officials to be sufficient punishment, as it ensured that he would not be able to apply for immigration status in any other country where he might choose to settle. It was doubtless with a sense of relief that the Canadian government found that some time in 2006-7, Singh had illegally entered the United States.

The Nightingale

But Singh’s presence in Canada would spur two important events. First, the legal documents from the case were scrutinized by international human rights lawyers, who became familiar with his modus operandi—that is, of using pro-government militants to carry out a campaign of kidnapping, extortion, torture, and murder. These militants, known as renegades, were recruited from among surrendered militants, trained, armed, paid, and protected by the army. They operated alongside special counterinsurgency forces like the Rashtriya Rifles to terrorize the civilian population and silence critics. According to the statements gathered by the SIT, the manner and reasons for the killing were varied; some of the victims were abducted and tortured to death, others were hanged by Major Singh himself, their bodies left lying along the National Highway with the intention of blaming the crime on armed, pro-independence militants. The reasons for the killings were also varied—extortion, personal animosities, settling family scores, random terror. With his signature ruthlessness, Singh perfected a strategy of disposing of evidence and effectively silencing witnesses, by killing in turn the renegades who had carried out the murders he ordered. One of the statements recorded by the SIT recounts a conversation between Major Singh and a renegade who managed to survive this killing spree: “At my insistance [T] (name withheld) had asked Major Avtar Singh why he killed Sikandar, [who] was working with [the] army. Major Avtar Singh replied that Sikandar and his associates know our secrets. Therefore we cannot trust them. In case he [is] caught by police, he will tell everything about us and will expose the army. Therefore it was better to kill them.” This deadly domino effect brought the known number of Major Singh’s victims to at least twenty-eight. Journalists who knew of him at the time described him as “a tyrant” and “drunk with power.” His colleagues nicknamed him Bulbul, “The Nightingale.”

Journalist Umar Sultan traced Avtar Singh’s other crimes: “Residents of the neighborhood of Batamaloo in downtown Srinagar remember Major Singh taking away scores of youths who were killed in various ways: ‘Our hands were tied from behind. The Major ordered his troops to throw the boy into the Jhelum and they did,’ says Junaid, one of Singh’s would-be victims. ‘I closed my eyes and started praying thinking I would be the next but I was brought back. I feared that nobody would know about my fate.’ Junaid recalls the time when he was held in a Palhalan camp in 1997, and Singh brought a local teacher over. ‘The Major tore his undershirt, bundled it and shoved it in the teacher’s throat with his cane,’ Junaid says. ‘The teacher died in front of my eyes.’ Junaid was later transferred to the Shariefabad army camp, on the outskirts of Srinagar. Major Singh would show up there too, this time bringing Junaid’s neighbors, Mohammad Shaban and his son Yahya Khan of Batamaloo, to the camp.”

“‘Yahya was already dead when he was brought to the camp, his father was tortured to death subsequently,’ recalls Junaid, who was released from Shariefabad two and a half months later. His memory of what he came across inside the garrison is chilling. ‘The Major was notorious for burning people alive in an iron tank inside the Shariefabad camp,’ he says.”

A second consequence of Singh’s presence in Canada was a showdown with India that Canada would lose. Starting some time in late 2007 or early 2008, Canadian immigration authorities began denying visas to Indian military and paramilitary personnel who had been involved in counterinsurgency operations in Kashmir. When this news hit the Indian media in 2010, the Indian government’s response was bullish, demanding that the Canadian government respect Indian sensitivities on Kashmir. In the run-up to the Indian prime minister’s visit to Canada for the G20 summit in May 2010, the Indian government issued a clear ultimatum: Canada could not afford to offend India, in the middle of a global recession. The Canadian Immigration Minister apologized profusely, called the policy a mistake, and promised that it would be discontinued. On immigration blogs, it was predicted that heads would roll; and so, with no discussion of the abuses that led to the visa denials, the first and only international effort to hold Indian military personnel accountable for human rights violations ended ignominiously. Victory for the violators.

Singh had absolute confidence that he would be protected. He even called the local police to complain about harassment when he heard rumors that a Kashmiri journalist had tracked him to his home in Fresno County.

In February 2011, Major Singh again made local headlines in a small town in Fresno County, California. His wife called the police in a domestic violence case, to report that he had tried to choke her. When he was taken into custody, the police found out that he was wanted for murder in Kashmir and that there was an Interpol Red Notice for his arrest. Though living illegally in the US, he owned a thriving trucking business. The Selma Police Chief called the State Department to ask if they should hold Major Singh so that he could be handed over to Interpol, but was told to let him go. His wife did not press charges, and for another year he lived in relative anonymity.

In Kashmir, meanwhile, Jalil Andrabi’s family and the High Court in Budgam continued to pressure the Indian government to extradite Singh to stand trial in India. It was clear to observers following the case that this was in fact the last thing the Indian government wanted; it was also clear to Singh himself, who gave a chillingly candid interview to an Indian journalist in June 2011.

He claimed that he knew who exactly was responsible for the murders, and that the Indian government did not want him in the dock: “There is no question of my being taken to India alive, they will kill me… The agencies, RAW, military intelligence, it is all the same… If the extradition does go through, I will open my mouth, I will not keep quiet.”

“These lives could have been saved if a trial of Major Avtar Singh was conducted on time,” said Andrabi’s brother Arshad. “We have lost that chance now. He was a known murderer and we are appalled that he was even shielded in the United States.”

In this standoff with the Indian government, Singh had absolute confidence that he would be protected. He even called the local police to complain about harassment when he heard rumors that a Kashmiri journalist had tracked him to his home in Fresno County and wanted to interview him. Despite an Interpol notice that he was wanted for murder, he was sure that the local police force would not touch him. In the end, it was not the law, but, apparently, his own haunted conscience that forced a final accounting for his crimes.

The killings in California, if not those in Kashmir, finally forced US media to take notice of the crimes committed by Major Singh. The New York Times, which for the past year had alternated stories of discovery of mass graves in Indian-administered Kashmir with accounts of booming tourism, finally managed to connect the two, conceding that peace can only be based on justice for past killings.

Back in Kashmir, the news of Major Singh’s latest murders and suicide received a subdued response. As Andrabi’s brother Arshad said, Singh’s family’s deaths were due to the Indian government’s refusal to initiate extradition proceedings. “These lives could have been saved if a trial of Major Avtar Singh was conducted on time,” he said. “We have lost that chance now. He was a known murderer and we are appalled that he was even shielded in the United States. It’s a failure of justice at all levels.”

Kashmiris are aware that Major Singh did not act alone. The abuses, torture and killings tellingly continue. As the nature of the revolt against Indian rule changes, returning to its roots as a popular uprising, so do chosen victims of the repression; now they are more likely to be teenagers, boys and young men who grew up knowing only military occupation, who came out into the streets to challenge Indian abuses in the summer of 2010. In the course of this popular uprising, which foreshadowed the Arab Spring, Indian forces killed 122 unarmed protesters, most of them teenagers, the youngest under 10 years old. Since then thousands have been arrested and tortured, many of them young children. They are charged under the Public Safety Act with “waging war against the nation.” Pictures posted on Facebook show these children being beaten and arrested by police and paramilitaries, brought to court and for school examinations in handcuffs and chains. Kashmiris posting on Facebook about the continuing abuses are under constant threat from the army and police.

Matt Eisenbrandt of the Canadian Centre for International Justice is a human rights lawyer who has been among the pioneers in applying the principles of Universal Jurisdiction to bring human rights abusers to justice, no matter where they try to seek shelter: “The Avtar Singh case demonstrates perfectly why we need Universal Jurisdiction to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity and extrajudicial killings in any court around the world and why governments need to exercise that authority. Clearly, the government of India had no interest in bringing Singh to justice for the murder of Jalil Andrabi. But Singh’s presence in Canada and the United States provided opportunities for him to be held accountable in those countries.”

To Eisenbrandt, the failure is clearly systemic and sprawls across borders. “The U.S. government,” he says, “after initially locating and detaining Singh and ordering him deported, took no further steps. Despite being fully aware of Singh’s alleged role in Mr. Andrabi’s murder, the United States took no action. Even after Singh was arrested for domestic violence, nothing was done. At each step along the way, governments had the power to hold Singh accountable but they never did.”

As Jalil Andrabi knew sixteen years ago, these abuses are no aberration. This long chronicle of violence indicates that Indian rule in Kashmir rests on military force and, according to many, has no political legitimacy. The historical and legal grounds for India’s claim to Kashmir are contested by the likes of authors Pankaj Mishra, Arundhati Roy, and Pakistani-British historian Tariq Ali, among many others. In the London Review of Books, Perry Anderson writes that India’s claims to Kashmir are based on “a document, now recently ‘discovered,’ on which the Indian state bases its entire claim to Kashmir, but was unable to produce for over half a century… Still, it remained all too obvious that a province with an overwhelming Muslim majority had been acquired by force and—as would in due course become clear—fraud.” The United Nations recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory, and maintains military observers on both sides of the Line of Control dividing Indian-held Kashmir from the Pakistani side. In April 2012, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions, Christof Heyns, visited Srinagar and met the family of Andrabi; as well as those of five young men who were kidnapped by the army and murdered at Pathribal, then passed off as militants accused of a massacre; he met too with Shakeel Ahangar, whose wife and sister were both raped and murdered, their bodies found in shallow water near one of the army camps surrounding Shopian, and Masooda Parveen, whose husband Ghulam Mohi-ud-din Regoo was detained, tortured and killed by the army in 1998. Heyns’s visit was hosted by the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP), a remarkable group which under the leadership of Parveena Ahangar, one of the mothers of the disappeared, has led the way in seeking justice and accountability for human rights abuses in Kashmir.

According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Heyns’s report called upon the Indian government to “take measures to fight impunity in cases of extrajudicial executions, and communal and traditional killings.” Given how far the Indian government has gone to protect criminals like Singh, these words rang empty to many. Kashmiris and a small but growing global constituency concerned with the resolution of the conflict are also aware that the Indian government, which provides legal impunity to its military personnel, cannot be trusted to investigate and prosecute their crimes. In fact, the Indian Supreme Court twice dismissed legal challenges to the Armed Forces Special Powers Act—in 1997 and 2007—arguing that it is an essential element of Indian government in border regions. In light of this, I would argue that it is time for an International Criminal Tribunal on Kashmir, to record and account for twenty-three years of crimes against humanity. It is from this record that a real political solution can emerge.

G

Shubh Mathur is an Indian anthropologist whose interests include human rights, nations and borders, the death penalty, minorities, immigration and Muslim communities in the United States, gender, South Asia, and the Indian Ocean world. She has conducted fieldwork in India, New York City, and Kashmir. Her first book, The Everyday Life of Hindu Nationalism, was published by the Three Essays Collective press. She is currently working on a collaborative ethnography with the families of the disappeared in Kashmir.

Readers like you make Guernica possible. Please show your support.

Tagged with:

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterAdd to BufferShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrSubmit to StumbleUpon
Submit to redditShare on App.netShare via email

You might also like

17 comments for Impunity in India

  1. Comment by Shabina on February 1, 2013 at 3:50 am

    Great article. Facts stated and very well written. Thank You Shubh Mathur, for treading where very few Indians tread.

  2. Comment by Muhammad Faysal on February 1, 2013 at 3:53 am

    This is a very important piece. Excellently written and reported. The contours of occupation and militarization are immersed with blood of over half a million Kashmiris since 1947.

    Great work.

  3. Comment by Carol Grayson on February 1, 2013 at 7:18 am

    Excellent article… well researched. I am horrified but not surprised at lack of response to hold Major Avtar Singh to account. An International Criminal Tribunal on Kashmir is long overdue. I visited Kashmir myself back in 1991, listened to many stories of abuse by Indian forces and was shown photos of attrocities. I contacted human rights organisations on my return to UK… The experience was life changing in many ways!

  4. Comment by Narayani on February 1, 2013 at 3:43 pm

    Officers (& enlisted men) on long combat duty in combat zones start having mental illnesses. The US army has many, many such men, UK Paras on duty in Ireland had many, many such men, there have been reports of cannibalism in Kosovo. The US Army was involved in trafficking of East European women while on UN missions long ago. The way to deal with such men is to provide psychological help.

    Uninformed, sweeping statements like “India’s proud claims as the world’s most populous democracy are fatally tainted” reflect a lack of maturity in a journalist. OR an over ambitious streak. Perhaps you shall get the CNN dollars one day or BBC pounds for ‘impartial reporting’.
    But if he doesnt get suitable compensation, I hope it weighs heavily on his conscience to use an individual’s actions to taint his own country.

  5. Comment by vivek on February 2, 2013 at 12:19 am

    Did the Central Govt. in Delhi have a Kashmir policy or a Punjab policy or did things simply happen by default? The actions of the Indian Govt. during the 80’s- whether under Indira or Rajiv or V.P. Singh- defy explanation. Then, as now, the Govt. had no vision of how states like Kashmir and Punjab can develop industrially so as to provide jobs suitable for young people with better educations and different aspirations from their elders. Both Punjab and Kashmir were labeled border states and thus not suitable for industrialization. What were the young people supposed to do? The Indian State was perfectly happy for them to turn to politics- extremist or otherwise- because that is a game it understands all to well. If there aren’t enough genuine militants, create fake militants and imaginary splits which will soon turn into the real thing. The Center gains a sort of vicarious machismo by sending in supposed ‘strong-men’ as Governors. It licenses extra-judicial killing by the Police (which was itself highly factionalized) in Punjab and elements of the Army in Kashmir. In the process, a nexus is created such that all types of criminal activity and trafficking networks gain legitimacy- India was just one step away from having an ISI like State within a State.
    Why would Delhi, itself, dig the grave of the democracy which gives it power? What is the thinking behind this?
    The answer, it seems, is that there is no thinking at all going on. Just a settled complacency that protest of any sort will sooner or later turn into corrupt rent-seeking politics. Which Delhi is good at. Worse luck.

  6. Comment by Humanity>Country on February 2, 2013 at 3:47 pm

    @Narayani: Humanity is far more important than nationality. If my country is being murderous and abusive and I don’t want it to do it in my name, I must resist its behaviour, decray it, and expose it by all possible means.

  7. Comment by Shubh Mathur on February 2, 2013 at 7:17 pm

    @ Narayanan PTSD would be an interesting defense at a war crimes trial, but the point is that this mass murderer wasn’t brought to trial, instead he was shielded from facing justice in three countries.
    I don’t respond to personal attacks. Nor to the “everyone does this, why pick on India” exceptionalism. But comments like this are useful in showing exactly how superficial the facade of Indian democracy is – and behind it lurks a ethnofascism mired in Hindu majoritarianism, which is how democracy is understood by the Indian elite. Manifest also in the utter lack of concern for Kashmiri lives.
    Tainted is a mild word, the country is drenched in the blood of minorities, Dalits and tribals murdered in the six decades and more of Independence. I’m just the messenger.

  8. Comment by Narayani on February 3, 2013 at 5:42 am

    Shubh, Indian democracy is a hard won victory of plurism after centuries of thousands of years of deepset suspicious and acrimony – it is an amalgamation fifty or more medieval countries.

    I am a Tamil residing in Delhi since I was 12, and I have never felt more at home anywhere else. This, I think is a statement that very well summarizes the direction in which India is going. And I would like it to keep going – the rest will fall into place in a 100 years.

    By being blind to the past problems and comparing it to 400 year old democracies that speak one language and pray at one, at most two types of churches, I think you are doing a great disservice to your own intelligence. We have just begun, let us not act as if we were born yesterday.

    And I repeat, Avtar SIngh was an anomaly. I was raised in an army establishment. I can assure you, it is not the norm to have officers with psychological problems roaming free.

  9. Comment by Riyaz on February 3, 2013 at 12:22 pm

    Hats off to shubh…..At least there are sane voices that prevail,especially when the truth is hidden and falsehood bred ,crimes against humanity committed in the most brutal manner by the indian army in kashmir.

  10. Comment by Shubh Mathur on February 3, 2013 at 7:59 pm

    The case of Major Avtar Singh is not anomalous. A recent report by a human rights group in Kashmir on perpetrators of human rights violations finds that “Out of 214 cases a list emerges of 500 individual perpetrators, which include 235 army personnel, 123 paramilitary personnel, 111 Jammu and Kashmir Police personnel and 31 Government backed militants/associates. Among the alleged perpetrators are two Major Generals and three Brigadiers of the Indian Army, besides nine Colonels, three Lieutenant Colonels, 78 Majors and 25 Captains. Add to this, 37 senior officials of the federal Paramilitary forces, a recently retired Director General of the Jammu and Kashmir Police, as well as a serving Inspector General.” You can find the full report at http://kafila.org/2012/12/06/full-report-alleged-perpetrators-stories-of-impunity-in-jammu-kashmir/
    Cases of abuse against the civilian population by the Indian army are reported not only from Kashmir but also the northeast, and from Sri Lanka and the Congo, where Indian troops were part of UN peacekeeping operations.
    The army establishment is not where you will find the truth about these crimes. For example, the interview in the NYT with a high ranking officer who opposes ending AFSPA in Kashmir, at http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/a-conversation-with-lt-gen-baljit-singh-jaswal-former-commander-of-kashmir/
    He describes Operation Sadbhavna (goodwill) “… the Americans have copied us in Afghanistan. They are doing the same. It is empowerment of the women, providing education, integration of the population with India, providing goodwill schools.”
    And the Kashmiri version, reported by a veteran journalist: “…of a man who lives in Kupwara, close to many sites of unmarked and mass graves. Some years ago the army detained him, and allegedly tortured him so badly inside a camp that he lost one of his legs completely and drags another with the use of crutches. His hands, he alleges were burnt on a blue stove and he finally had to have a few fingers amputated. He was later selected by the army for a tour to Taj Mahal, under its hearts and minds campaign – ‘Operation Sadbhavna, or Goodwill’.
    http://kashmirreader.com/06252012-ND-torture-chamber-to-taj-mahal-838.aspx

    @Narayani you should think very carefully about the idea that loyalty to your country requires you to deny and cover up such crimes

    @ Humanity>Country your screen name says it all; thanks to all comments in support, as you can see just reporting these crimes is incredibly difficult. The next step is to see justice done.

  11. Comment by Gagan Singh on February 4, 2013 at 4:34 pm

    The link at the bottom Shubh to Mathur’s book is broken.

  12. Comment by jasdeep on February 5, 2013 at 2:10 am

    Why soldiers have to kill like a crime, I understand that they are taught to kill people but killing civilians under the false blame!!
    Avtar did pass info tho US government about India state therefore he got pass to live in US even being entered illegal in US!!

  13. Comment by jasdeep on February 5, 2013 at 2:13 am

    Nice piece of journalism!!

  14. Comment by ali on February 7, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    thanx for the truth mam, i am from rajouri district of j&k and i request you to write about the innocent killings,rapes,and many more demage which ir done by the indian army of sikh rajment esp in 1965 in rajouri and poonch and after ward the killing and torture of innocet and poor peoples esp from 1990

  15. Comment by Ben on February 12, 2013 at 12:18 pm

    @Narayani: The writer of this excellent and measured piece didn’t even include one of the biggest bombshells about Avtar Singh… India gave the guy a passport to flee the country AFTER an Indian court forbade it! Sorry, but the isolated PTSD defense just doesn’t cut it when you look at the actions of the government in this case. See this: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2012/0911/Monitor-report-Charged-with-murder-Indian-Army-officer-got-passport-fled-to-US

  16. Comment by 103 Infantry Battalion Sikh Light Infantry on February 23, 2013 at 5:01 pm

    Once a soldier who served in some of the most dangerous terrains in the world, a veteran of numerous counter insurgency operations, made a scapegoat, forced to flee his own country by the very government he swore allegiance to and finally reduced to having to end his family’s life to safeguard his dignity,

    It was an honor to have once served with you, still recollect memories of you from Rawalpora, Your dedication to India was unquestionable.

    For a man who had served in Sri Lanka, Kashmir and the north east dedicated years of military service to his country, and the recipient of 4 gallantry awards, an honorable death is what you should have received

    Deeds not words . Brave person dies only once, coward , endless times – Maj Avtar Singh

    may you Rest in peace Major

  17. Comment by Sharan on June 24, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    I am really shocked by the comments on this article. For Mr Jasdeep Major Avtar was a soldier not a traitor. He killed terrorists that’s what army is trained to do. Indrabi was a lawyer but he was an active member of JKLF, why do people forget that. Major Avtar loved his country he could have sacrificed thousands lives for his country and his country’s honour unlike cowards like you. He could have stayed in India and unveiled the corrupt politicians and forces but he decided to keep his mouth shut for the integrity of his country. So before you utter rubbish from your pie hole try to know the truth and as for the writer of this column is concerned Major Avtar never served in 35 Rashtriya rifles check his service record.

Leave a comment




Anti-Spam Quiz:

Subscribe without commenting