[Most of all, however, Gogoi’s action was a violation of the right to
life and liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The army is bound to uphold the Constitution. At all times, its
actions must be aimed at protecting the citizens of the country. Dar
is an Indian citizen.]

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/kashmir-human-shield-kashmir-stone-pelting-an-award-for-major-nitin-leetul-gogoi-4672323/

An award for Gogoi
When institutions of the state do not conduct themselves according to
the law, they endanger legitimacy of the state itself

By: Editorial | Updated: May 25, 2017 10:11 am

The army chief, General Bipin Rawat, said that whatever the outcome of
of the inquiry, there is no reason for disciplinary action against
Gogoi.

The army’s commendation of Major Nitin Leetul Gogoi, the officer who
tied Farooq Ahmed Dar, a Kashmiri artisan, to an army jeep’s bonnet
and paraded him, apparently using him as a human shield for his troops
against stone-pelters, is a troubling move. For one, it pre-empted due
process — the army’s own internal inquiry into the circumstances of
the officer’s action. The army chief, General Bipin Rawat, said that
whatever the outcome of of the inquiry, there is no reason for
disciplinary action against Gogoi.

Only last week, India made a case for the importance of due process at
the International Court of Justice in its legal battle to save
Kulbhushan Jadhav, sentenced to death on charges of spying by a
Pakistani military court. India also invoked the Vienna Convention and
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. There is no
evidence that Dar was a stone-pelter.

In fact, by all accounts, he was among the pitifully small number of
Kashmiris who defied the mood on the ground to vote in the Srinagar
parliamentary by-election held on that day. Gogoi’s action was also a
violation of the ICCPR that lays down that no one shall be subjected
to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Most of all, however, Gogoi’s action was a violation of the right to
life and liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The army is bound to uphold the Constitution. At all times, its
actions must be aimed at protecting the citizens of the country. Dar
is an Indian citizen.

Justifying torture or the degrading use of one civilian as something
that helped to save hundreds of lives, including those of the troops
under Gogoi’s command, raises more questions than it answers. Is it
being suggested here that Gogoi’s only other option was to shoot into
a crowd, to kill? When institutions of the state do not conduct
themselves according to the law, they endanger the legitimacy of the
state itself.

General Bipin Rawat has said Gogoi was given the award “to ensure the
confidence level of the officer and others operating in a similar
environment”. This should rightly raise concern about the message it
has sent out to troops deployed in Kashmir and in other theatres in
the country about the limits of acceptable conduct for the world’s
third largest professional army. Just as importantly, it should raise
concerns about the message it sends out to an already alienated people
in the Valley.


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to