Is standing up for human  rights make one a Maoist ?
 - the police do not  observe their own rules in arresting a person  
  
 Stan  Swamy  
  
 Massive displacement of people, especially the  Adivasis &  Moolvasis, is taking  place. It is done in violation of the Supreme Court's directive [Samata Judgement, 1997] that the  government should consult the concerned Gram Sabha before starting any project.  It is natural, therefore, people have begun to resist displacement and refuse to  hand over their land to industry and mining. Of late, the Jharkhand, Orissa and  Chattisgarh governments have started arresting human rights activists who are  providing leadership to anti-displacement and  anti-communal  movements.
 The list is long, but I will mention only some of  the more prominent among them:
 Jitan Marandi               Jharkhand            author, poet, human  rights activist
 Damodar Turi             Jharkhand             anti-displacement  &  human rights  activist
 Munni Hansdah             Jharkhand       anti-displacement &  human rights  activist
 Ram Charan Roy          Jharkhand            anti-displacement  &  human rights  activist
 Hopna Baskey                Jharkhand             anti-displacement  &  human rights  activist
 Abhay Sahu                     Orissa                   anti-displacement &   human rights activist
 Lenin Kumar                  Orissa                   author  & anti-communal activist
 Ravi Jena                         Orissa              publisher & anti-communal activist  
 Dhananjay Lenka            Orissa                anti-communal  activist                                 
 Protima Das                   Orissa             advocate &  anti-displacement activist
 Pradeep                           Orissa            anti-displacement  activist
 Binayak Sen          Chattisgarh     medical doctor &  human rights activist                       
 And there are many more.    
  
 Adding insult to injury . . .  the police do not observe their own  rules.
 The National Police Commission (1997)  affirms that Legal Protection/Safeguards for Detainees in Custody are inherent  in Article 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution and therefore require to be  recognised and scrupulously protected. Some such safeguards  are:
 1)       An arrested person being held  in custody is entitled to have one friend or relative informed that he has  been arrested and where he is being detained.
 2)       The police officer shall  inform the arrested person when he is brought to the  police station of this right.
 3)       An entry should be made in  the Diary as to who was informed of the arrest.  A police officer making an arrest should  also record in the Case Diary the reasons for making the  arrest.
 Apart from the above, the historic judgement of  the Supreme Court in D.K.Basu v/s State  of West Bengal (AIR 1997 SC 610) compels the Indian police force to follow  these requirements:
 1)       The police personnel  carrying out the arrest and handling the  interrogation of the arrestee should bear accurate, visible and clear  identification and name tags with their  designations.
 2)       The police officer carrying  out the arrest shall prepare a memo of arrest at the time of arrest and  such memo shall be attested by at least one witness, who may be either a  member of the family of the arrestee or a respectable person of the locality. It  shall also be countersigned by the arrestee and shall contain the time and date  of arrest.
 3)       The person arrested must  be made aware of this right to have someone informed of his arrest as soon as he  is put under arrest or is  detained.
 4)       An entry must be made in  the Diary disclosing the name of the friend / relative who has been informed of  the arrest.
 5)       The arrestee should, where he  so requests, be also examined at the time of his arrest and major and minor  injuries on his body must be recorded.
 6)       The "Inspection Memo" must  be signed  both by the arrestee and  the police officer, and its copy provided to the  arrestee.
 7)       The arrestee should be  subjected to medical examination by a trained doctor every 48 hours during  his detention in custody.
 8)       The arrestee may be  permitted to meet his lawyer during the  interrogation.
 9)       The right of every person  detained /  arrested to know the  grounds of arrest  and his right to  bail should be honoured.
 10)   Failure to comply with the  requirements mentioned above shall apart from rendering the concerned official  liable for departmental action, also render him liable to be punished for  contempt of court.
 Added to these are the recommendations of the Law Commission (November 2000)  that 
 1)       representatives of  registered rights groups and NGOs should be entitled, under law, to visit police  stations and examine custodial records.
 2)       Arrest or search of women  should only take place in the presence of women police officers and should not  take place at night.
 3)       Women should be detained  separately from men. The effectiveness of this  gender-based detention should be monitored by independent  mechanisms.
  
 The reality is very different. .  .
  There are serious flaws in the way  police goes about arresting people. 
 1)       most often the police raids a  place like a bull-dozer breaking doors and any thing that is on the way. The  custom among Adivasi people is they leave footware outside and enter their house  bare-footed. The place where they prepare and have their food ('adig') is considered a sacred place  where the spirits of their dead ancestors dwell. The police have no  consideration for the cultural values of people and enter the house with  their dirty boots, pushing and thrashing any and every body in the  house.
 2)       The police do not usually  produce 'search warrant' but jump on the person they have come to catch.  Then they search the house / office turning every thing up side down. They  usually bring with them some leaflets / booklets called "maoist / naxalite  literature" and pretend they found it in the premises.
 3)       Rarely is a respected  local person present during the raid to bear witness  to the search operation. Some times one or two 'police informers' may be brought  along who will do the police bidding.
 4)       It is a  rare occasion a "search-inventory"is  made which is signed by the arrestee and one other  witness.
 5)       Once they have arrested a  person they want, they can do any thing to him / her. The arrestee is brought to  the police station, beaten up brutally like an animal under the pretense of  "extracting truth / evidence".
 6)       Can the police in all  honesty say they do not use 'third degree methods' on the  detainees?
 7)       if the police wants to put  the label "naxalite / extremist / maoist", they just place a table, put some old  pistols / guns on it, line up the detainees behind the table and call some press  persons to take a photograph and publish in local news papers. Sadly, many of  the press reporters also go along with the police version without checking /  verifying the facts.
 Once this is done, the general public is made to  believe that the detainees are really extremists and the police have done well  in catching them.
  
 But who will bell the  cat?
 Sadly, we cannot look up to the  local government to come to the rescue of   these victims of police atrocity.   In fact the local govt administration is part of the game.  Neither can we expect the district-level  judiciary to save them because it goes by the version of the police and even  refuses to grant bail. 
 The electronic media and the  press in general play safe and mostly project govt 
 views. Only in exceptional and  shocking cases such as Babri Masjid demolition,
 Gujerat genocide, Orissa  Kandhamal attack on Christians we saw some sane
 reaction from the mass media.  There are plenty of intellectuals, authors, legal
 experts, artists who can play a  healthy role. Only they need to be helped to form
 distinct forums of their own so  they can speak their mind when glaring human
 rights violations take place.  Last but not the least are the masses of people who
 through specific People's  Movements and People's Organisations can undertake
 civil disobedience movements.  There is nothing like people's power. Shri
 Jayprakash Narayan has shown us  the way. 
  
 We are then left with human  rights and democratic rights organisations at local,
 national and international levels  who alone will come forward to defend the
 human & constitutional rights  of the unjustly arrested and tortured human rights
 activists. The challenge before  us is to network these groups and organisations
 so they become strong pressure  groups. And if they can be connected to
 international bodies like the  United Nations Human Rights Commission it can
 go a long way in  safeguarding human rights. There is no other way.   
  
  
 20 December 08