“Being Neutral is Our Biggest Crime” - Global Coalition to Protect ...

investigation into human rights abuses within the state. 151 SHRC is also empowered
to initiate action based on complaints received by it. 152 But its members told Human
Rights Watch that they had not initiated any suo motu investigation into human
rights abuses. 153 They further stated that they had not received any complaints
regarding Salwa Judum or Naxalite abuses against villagers from Dantewada and
Bijapur districts. 154 However, local NGOs said that they had submitted many
complaints to the SHRC that went uninvestigated. 155
On April 15, 2008, in response to a petition presented before it in 2007, the Supreme
Court of India ordered the NHRC to “examine/verify” allegations of human rights
abuses and submit a report to the court. 156 The court further ordered the Indian
central and Chhattisgarh state governments to cooperate during the inquiry. 157
D. Government intimidation of NGOs, journalists, and lawyers
Lawyers, NGOs, and journalists told Human Rights Watch that they feel insecure and
fear arbitrary arrest as Naxalite sympathizers whenever they voice criticism of
government policy on the Naxalite issue or criticize the Salwa Judum campaign. 158
151 Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, http://nhrc.nic.in/hract.htm#Chap1, sec. 29 read with sec. 12.
152 Ibid.
153 Human Rights Watch group interview with Chairperson Singh and two other members, Chhattisgarh State Human Rights
Commission, Raipur, December 17, 2007.
154 Ibid. The Chhattisgarh SHRC members stated that between April 2005 and March 2006, they had received only two
complaints on issues related to Naxalism, but were not sure whether these complaints emerged out of the conflict in
Dantewada and Bijapur districts. In one of the cases in 2006, they had awarded compensation to the complainant—the
complainant’s child was mistaken for a Naxalite and shot dead by the police. They were not able to furnish Human Rights
Watch with more details regarding this case. The SHRC members stated that they had not received any other complaints
pertaining to the conflict between government security forces, Salwa Judum, and Naxalites.
155 Human Rights Watch interviews with Subash Mohapatra, Forum for Fact-Finding, Documentation, and Advocacy, Raipur,
December 17, 2007; Himanshu Kumar, Vanvasi Chetna Ashram, Kawalnar, December 9, 2007. Mohapatra told Human Rights
Watch that he had filed more than 300 complaints on a wide range of issues including human rights abuses in the context of
the conflict in Bijapur and Dantewada districts, and said that a majority of them had gone uninvestigated.
156 Nandini Sundar and others v. State of Chhattisgarh, Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 6462 of 2008, Order, April 15,
2008, http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/wc%2025007p.txt (accessed April 17, 2008).
157 Ibid.
158 Human Rights Watch interviews with Ratneshwar Nath, Kanker, January 25, 2008; Rajendra Sail, People’s Union for Civil
Liberties, Raipur, December 17, 2007; K.P. Agarwal, advocate, Jagdalpur, February 2, 2008; Himanshu Kumar, first interview,
December 9, 2007; Subash Mohapatra, Forum for Fact-Finding, Documentation, and Advocacy, Raipur, December 17, 2007;
Kamlesh Paikra, former journalist, Dantewada, December 11, 2007.
61
Human Rights Watch July 2008