We Have No Orders to Save You - Human Rights Watch

Failure to Provide Humanitarian Assistance
Guiding Principle 18 states that “competent authorities” should provide internally displaced persons with essential
food and potable water, basic shelter and housing, appropriate clothing and essential medical services and
sanitation “regardless of the circumstances, and without discrimination.” The government of Gujarat failed to
provide adequate and timely humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons. Problems included serious
delays in government assistance reaching relief camps, inadequate state protection for displaced persons and relief
convoys, and failure to provide medical and food supplies and build sanitation facilities. Moreover,
nongovernmental relief workers seeking to assist victims of violence were limited by a lack of access and
protection. The onus of providing much needed relief rested largely on local NGO and Muslim voluntary
groups. 194
A report sponsored by the Citizens’ Initiative in Ahmedabad, titled Rebuilding from the Ruins, found that
government officials also routinely underreported the figures of those residing in relief camps, partly to minimize
their own obligations to the residents, and partly to further the notion that “normalcy” was returning to the state. 195
Several camps in Ahmedabad were also not recognized by the government and therefore did not receive any state
rations or relief supplies. 196 Inspecting officers often visited camps in the middle of the day, when most of the
wage earners were out pursuing their vocations, resulting in artificially low estimates of the number of residents
in camps and food ration entitlements. While voluntary organizations tried to meet these expenses through
donations and contributions, they found it difficult to run the camps indefinitely. 197
In January 2003, Human Rights Watch visited Shah-e-Alam camp, the largest camp in Ahmedabad. Though the
camp area, which is situated in a dargah (a traditional meeting ground for Hindus and Muslims), seemed largely
uninhabited at the time of our visit; at the height of the violence approximately 12,500 people resided there.
According to one of its managers, the camp was closed on August 23, 2002, two months after the government
ended its official support. Between March and June the government provided 300 grams of flour, 100 grams of
rice, 50 grams of dal, 50 grams of milk powder, 50 grams of oil, and five rupees per person per day. Apart from
this five rupee allotment per person per day the camp received no additional financial support from the
government. Instead, money was collected from local community members or by placing advertisements in
newspapers. 198 A camp resident told Human Rights Watch:
When the government gave food here, there were so many bugs inside what they gave, and that’s
what we ate. What could we do? We had no choice. And then the committee people, they saved
our lives and brought us here and for ten or twelve days, they were the ones feeding us – the
government gave us nothing. And then after ten to twelve or even fifteen days, the government
gave rations to the camp but even in what they sent there were so many bugs and other things in
the flour and in the rice; the kids used to fall sick from eating it. What could we do? We had to
eat. 199
194 For more on access to humanitarian assistance in relief camps see Human Rights Watch, “We Have No Orders to Save
You,” Chapter VIII.
195 HIC, YUVA, Rebuilding from the Ruins , p. 28. A semblance of “normalcy” would also promote the state’s bid for early
state assembly elections. “Gujarat ready for polls, says governor,” Times of India, June 6, 2002. For more on the elections,
see Chapter XI.
196 HIC, YUVA, Rebuilding from the Ruins, p. 40. The investigating team also visited Hindu camps but found that they were
mostly empty “indicating a greater sense of security and confidence amongst Hindus in camps to be able to go out, move
about the city and resume their regular lives.” Ibid., p. 35. The report added that Hindu camps received far better official
support from the government, in the form of visits by prominent politicians and the involvement of local officials in running
the camps. Ibid., p. 36.
197 Election Commission of India, “Press Note,” pp. 31-32.
198 Human Rights Watch interview with Shah-e-Alam camp manager, Ahmedabad, January 3, 2003.
199 Human Rights Watch interview with camp resident (name withheld), Ahmedabad, January 2, 2003.
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH 39 JULY 2003, Vol. 15, No. 3 (C)