IMPHAL, March 8: Saying that fake encounters will stop once a Special Investigation Team (SIT) steps in Manipur, Advocate Mukul Sinha, Advocate for the proceedings conducted by Supreme Court appointed Commission said that his own experience with taking up cases of extra judicial killings in Gujarat has shown that when legal cases start giving results, hundreds of cases will be filed automatically and people will themselves go to the court which would lead to a movement.
Advocate Sinha was interacting with media persons at the Conference hall of the Human Rights Alert today before his departure from Imphal.
Mention may be made that Advocate Mukul Sinha had taken up cases with regard to the alleged fake encounter cases in Gujarat, leading to charge sheets filed by the CBI against high ranking cops including Police Chief, IPS officers and Home Minister of the state.
Sinha was the defence lawyer in the Ishrat Jehan case amongst others.
“What I saw in last three days has shocked us. We thought that we had already seen the worst in Gujarat, but I think there is another state left (Manipur). So the last hope and the last resort is to continue what you all are doing and I think there is very possible method of countering what has been done till today”, he said pointing to the affidavits of over 1500 cases filed at the Supreme Court earlier that had led to the Supreme Court Inquiry Commission.
Asked on his observations on the cases of alleged fake encounter in Manipur, the Advocate said, “From the evidence which I came across during the cross examinations, my belief is that it’s not only cold blooded murder but at the same time the complicity and the complacency both that it`s so obvious that they think they are totally immune to any form of legal action.”
“When I cross examined an officer at the level of SP (Pushpanjali) not only did she not know what are the de-notified area under AFSPA but that she does not care. What worries us is not only ignorance but the complete callousness”, he said.
When asked if it is not her duty to prevent an illegal operation, after a long thought she says yes which means that she should know what the de-notified areas are, otherwise how will she prevent,` but they are least bothered,` Sinha continued.
`It was a completely wrong statement she was making. When I asked her that had she read the official order, she said no, she was turning and twisting all the statements she made that day,` he said.
Calling upon the media to carry out a campaign on disclosing what are the instructions to top police officers regarding the de-notified area under the AFSPA because at least in these places, the government must prevent the operation, which cannot be carried out whatever right or wrong the reason.
Sinha said it was unnerving that during the cross examination of the first witness (Bronson Thanga) when he was asked where does he derive his power to shoot, to carry out an operation, Thanga replied almost unabashedly and without the slightest hesitation that “we can do it”.
In the district he don’t need to ask anybody, if he have to go out to other district he have to seek permission of SP, that permission is also coloured I have to tell and go.
In Gujarat, not a single encounter has taken place admittedly by them also without the sanction of the local CP or DSP. It is some other guy who is making him (Bronson) do all that, he said.
Observing that killing comes easily to the the commandos and other security personnel in the state, he pointed out, ” All they need is to add the word ‘reliable’ which is their licence to kill.
If you can add one word to make it `reliable information` of some UG operation, it is as if those were the magic words that opens up the scenario for shooting, Sinha added.
He then said the witnesses are completely complacent and are feeling neither remorse nor worry.
`I would like to say what should happen and what we should move toward, is that ultimately this is only a preliminary inquiry. This inquiry will only give a prima facie conclusion whether what you all are alleging is on the face of advice or not and won`t punish anybody,” he said. Sinha added that the Commission will be winded up the moment the report is filed and will not exist after that. The next move, he said would be to argue after the report is given we definitely need an SIT. The SIT should have three types of member, one member should be nominated by the Central government, one appointed by state government and one by victims, so that it is a balanced body, so that there is at least one person who can be trusted and we would also try to persuade the Commission to recommend that certain major cases be handed over to the SIT for investigation.
Asked by IFP on what parallels can be drawn between the cases that he had handled in Gujarat and what is happening in Manipur, Advocate Sinha said that his readings have shown that there has been latent misuse of state power and the state machinery. “It is completely against the rule of law that all constitutional rights of the citizen like the right of life, right of inquiry and right of information are misused.”