A democracy is supposed to protect its citizens. More than 100,000 Muslims have been killed by the security forces in Kashmir. The persistant and continued abuse of Islam and Muslims in the country called Bharat is reprehensible.

“Even today there is increasing ghettoisation and isolation of Muslims in certain areas,

“At the same time, organised groups based on religious ideologies have unleashed the fear of mob violence in many parts of the country,” .. “This institutionalised impunity for those who exploit religion and impose their religious intolerance on others has made peaceful citizens, particularly the minorities, vulnerable and fearful.”

 Muslims persecuted in India’ , Friday, March 21, 2008, By Our Correspondent

A LARGE number of Muslims have been arrested on ill-founded suspicions of terrorism in India, said United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHCR) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief Asma Jahangir.

Concluding her mission to India in Delhi, Asma through a press release issued on Thursday observed that India was a diverse country where different religions and beliefs were duly respected in an established secular framework. She said that she had visited Amritsar, Delhi, Jammu, Srinagar, Ahmedabad, Mumbai, Thiruvananthapuram, Bhubaneswar and Lucknow during her mission. Asma said that she was deeply touched after hearing about the exodus of the Kashmiri Pundits in 1990s following a campaign of threats and violence in Jammu and Kashmir.

She said that they had remained dislocated even today despite the fact the de-escalation of violence in Jammu and Kashmir had a positive impact on religious tolerance. She said that many interlocutors confirmed continuing bias amongst security forces against Muslims, who had been facing problems with regard to issuing of passports and security clearances for employment purposes.

She said that there were also reports of discrimination against them outside of Jammu and Kashmir, such as the refusal of hotel bookings. The Muslims were disturbed that terrorism was associated with their religion despite various public statements from Muslim leadership denouncing terrorism, she said.

She acknowledged that she received high level of cooperation both from the Indian government and from the citizens as well. She maintained that concerning the legal framework, the political system of India was of a federal nature and that the States had wide powers and the level of action of the government to protect its citizens in terms of freedom of religion or belief varied according to the states concerned.

She observed that there were democratic safeguards within the system and all the institutions accumulated a vast experience in protecting human rights. “Many of my interlocutors have pointed to the positive impact of Indian secularism as embodied in the Constitution and all the Indians did value secular principles,” Asma said. She added that she was informed time and again that the term ‘secularism’ might have different connotation in India as it was generally interpreted in other countries.

She said that the central government in India had developed a comprehensive policy pertaining to minorities including religious ones and she complimented various recent reports on religious minorities drafted by the committees headed by Justice Rajender Sachar in 2006 and by Justice Renganath Misra in 2007.

She observed that such committees fully mandated by the government were a good example of mechanisms put in place to analyse the situation besides putting forward recommendations for the Indian government to take action upon. While praising The Indian National Commission for Minorities (INCM), which had taken up several challenges, she said that its members had always taken a prompt action against criminals besides issuing independent reports on incidents of communal violence with concrete recommendations.

She pointed out that the performance of various human rights commissions had depended on the selection of its members generally and the importance various governments usually attached to their mandates.

Asma suggested that members of such commissions should have an acute sensitivity to human rights issues reflecting the diversity – particularly in terms of gender – as women were one of the worst victims of religious intolerance. She noticed that women’s groups across religious lines were the most active and effective human rights advocates in situations of communal tensions across the country.

She said that it was generally recognised by a large number of individuals she met in India that a comprehensive legal framework to protect their rights had, no doubt, existed but many of them especially from religious minorities had shown disgruntlement with the process of its effective implementation.

She claimed that the Indians had always respected the diversity of religions and beliefs but many organised groups based on religious ideologies had unleashed the fear of mob violence in many parts of the country.

Law enforcement agencies were often reluctant to take any action against individuals or groups that had perpetuated violence in the name of religion or belief, she observed. She said that this institutionalised impunity for those who exploited religion and imposed their religious intolerance on others had made innocent citizens particularly the minorities more vulnerable to communal violence and fear.

She said that she had also received numerous reports of attacks on religious minorities and their places of worship as well as discrimination of disempowered sections of the Hindu community. She said that she had received concrete reports of violence and rapes as a reaction to cases of intermarriage between believers of different religions or castes in Uttar Pradesh.

Acts of violence continued to occur while perpetrators were dealt with some sympathy by the law enforcement agents, she said, while observing that this bias was in fact deep-rooted in society, which had made the protection of the victims even more difficult.

There was widespread violence in the Kandhamal district of Orissa, targeting primarily Christians in Dalit and tribal communities, she said, while claiming that she had received credible reports that members of the Christian community had warned the authorities in advance of the planned attacks of December 24 to 27, 2007. Even today, the tensions were prevalent and the anti-conversion legislation was being used to vilify Christians in general, she added.

Regarding the 2002 Gujarat massacre, she said that the state government had reported that, prior to the Godhra incident; Gujarat had witnessed 443 major communal incidents between 1970 and 2002. However, the massacre that took place after the tragic deaths at Godhra in 2002 was more horrifying, the report said.

She said that in her discussions with victims, she had seen their continuing fear, which was exacerbated by the distress that justice continued to evade most victims and survivors.

She observed that the Muslims were still being persecuted through various tactics including complete isolation in certain areas. She objected that the assertion of the State government that development would heal the wounds did not seem to be realistic. She emphasised that it was crucial to recognise that development without a policy of inclusiveness of all communities would only add to aggravate resentments and grudges of the minorities in the state.

Asma said that she was disturbed at various meetings with members of the civil society in Gujarat when the government agents in civvies interrupted her free discussion with them. She said that those security agents in fact had violated the terms of reference of fact-finding missions by Special Rapporteurs, which guarantee confidential and unsupervised contact with witnesses and other private persons as well as assurance by the government that no person, official or private individuals, who had been in contact with the Special Rapporteur in relation to the mandate would suffer threats, harassment or punishment or be subjected to judicial proceedings on this score.

She was also concerned at the extended timeframe of investigations in cases involving communal riots, violence and massacres such as those which had occurred in 1984, 1992 and 2002. She said that all of these incidents had continued to haunt the people affected by them and impunity had emboldened all the forces of intolerance.

She said that investigation should be accorded the highest priority by both the investigation, the judiciary and any other commissions appointed to study the situation. She observed that protraction of the inquiry had only kept tensions simmering besides devaluing justice.

She said that there was a real risk that similar communal violence might happen again unless incitement to religious hatred and political exploitation of communal tensions were effectively prevented.

She urged both the government and the non-state actors to diffuse tensions and address the root causes ahead of time.

The sincerity of the central government to implement the Sachar Committee report would be very much seen on the ground because the state governments had been given direction to follow-up on the recommendations of the report.

The visual arts industry in India had played an important role in public education regarding religious tolerance, she said, while adding that films were effectively banned by non-State actors through intimidation. She regretted that professionals seemed to seek the approval of the self-appointed custodians of religious sentiments before going ahead with a film which could touch upon communal issues.

She said that her mandate had also included the legal link between Scheduled Caste status and religious affiliation, the impact of anti-conversion laws in several states as well as the concerns voiced by Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and atheists.

She said that she had noticed encouraging signs in the fight against religious intolerance and she was highly impressed by the outstanding degree of human rights activism in India.

She said that she would submit a detailed report with conclusions and recommendations to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

She also thanked the Indian government for inviting her to study the situation with regard to freedom of religion or belief in India. She said that she had got an opportunity to meet with several government officials, including the Ministers of External Affairs, Minority Affairs and Culture as well as with the chief ministers of Delhi, Jammu and Kashmir, Gujarat, Kerala and Orissa besides conferring with the Solicitor General, Supreme Court Justices and High Court Judges as well as with members of various human rights and minority commissions during her mission to India.

India risks religious violence: Asma

* UN envoy ‘astonished’ at 44th deadline extension to Babri Mosque probe

NEW DELHI: India risks more religious violence like Gujarat’s 2002 riots that killed 2,500 people, as delays to bring justice encouraged an atmosphere of impunity, Asma Jahangir, the UN freedom of religion investigator, warned on Thursday.

“All these incidents continue to haunt the people affected by them and impunity emboldens forces of intolerance,” she told a news conference as she finished off a tour of India. “Today there is a real risk that similar communal violence might happen again unless incitement to religious hatred and political exploitation of communal tensions are effectively prevented,” she said.

“Even today there is increasing ghettoisation and isolation of Muslims in certain areas,” she said, referring to Gujarat state run by controversial Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi.

Babri Mosque: Jahangir criticised the slowness of government inquiries into previous religious clashes. She said she was “astonished” that one government commission probing the demolition of 16th century Babri Mosque in the northern Indian town of Ayodhya had received a 44th deadline extension. Jahangir criticised law-enforcement authorities for being reluctant to act against perpetuators of religious violence.

“At the same time, organised groups based on religious ideologies have unleashed the fear of mob violence in many parts of the country,” she said. “This institutionalised impunity for those who exploit religion and impose their religious intolerance on others has made peaceful citizens, particularly the minorities, vulnerable and fearful.”

She highlighted attacks on Indians marrying people from different castes and religions in northern India, and attacks on Christians, lower castes and tribal people in the eastern state of Orissa last year.

In Orissa, where many churches were attacked around Christmas last year, she said there were credible reports that members of the Christian community had alerted authorities in advance.