India

Although the 28 state governments have primary responsibility for maintaining law and order, the central Government provides guidance and support through the use of paramilitary forces throughout the country. The Union Ministry for Home Affairs controls most of the paramilitary forces, the internal intelligence bureaus, and the nationwide police service; it provides training for senior police officers of the state-organized police forces. The armed forces are under civilian control. Security forces committed numerous significant human rights abuses, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir and in the northeastern states.

The country is in transition from a government-controlled economy to one that largely is market oriented. The private sector is predominant in agriculture, most nonfinancial services, consumer goods manufacturing, and some heavy industry. Economic liberalization and structural reforms begun in 1991 continue, although momentum has slowed. The country's economic problems are compounded by population growth of 1.7 percent annually with a population of more than 1 billion. Income distribution remained very unequal, with the top 20 percent of the population receiving 39.3 percent of national income and the bottom 20 percent receiving 9.2 percent. Twenty percent of the urban population and 30 percent of the rural population live below the poverty level. Per Capita the gross national product (GNP) per capita was $480.

The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens in some areas; however, numerous serious problems remain in many significant areas. Significant human rights abuses included: Extrajudicial killings, including faked encounter killings, deaths of suspects in police custody throughout the country, and excessive use of force by security forces combating active insurgencies in Jammu and Kashmir and several northeastern states; torture and rape by police and other agents of the Government; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and incommunicado detention in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast; continued detention throughout the country of thousands arrested under special security legislation; lengthy pretrial detention; prolonged detention while undergoing trial; occasional limits on freedom of the press and freedom of movement; harassment and arrest of human rights monitors; extensive societal violence against women; legal and societal discrimination against women; female bondage and forced prostitution; child prostitution and female infanticide; discrimination against persons with disabilities; serious discrimination and violence against indigenous peoples and scheduled castes and tribes; widespread intercaste and communal violence; religiously-motivated violence against Christians and Muslims; widespread exploitation of indentured, bonded, and child labor; and trafficking in women and children.

Many of these abuses are generated by a traditionally hierarchical social structure, deeply rooted tensions among the country's many ethnic and religious communities, violent secessionist movements and the authorities' attempts to repress them, and deficient police methods and training. These problems are acute in Jammu and Kashmir, where judicial tolerance of the Government's heavy-handed counterinsurgency tactics, the refusal of security forces to obey court orders, and terrorist threats have disrupted the judicial system. In the northeast there was no clear decrease in the number of killings, despite negotiated ceasefires between the Government and some insurgent forces, and between some tribal groups.

The concerted campaign of execution-style killings of civilians by Kashmiri militant groups, begun in 1998, continued, and included several killings of political leaders and party workers. Separatist militants were responsible for numerous, serious abuses, including killing of armed forces personnel, police, government officials, and civilians; torture; rape; and brutality. Separatist militants also were responsible for kidnaping and extortion in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states.

Violence in Jammu and Kashmir continued to be a problem. The Government extended a cease fire in Jammu and Kashmir, begun in November 2000, until May. However, the Government ended the ceasefire in May due to the All-Parties Hurriyat Conference's (APHC) insistence on being allowed to visit Pakistan and the continued killings by militants in Jammu and Kashmir. In July Prime Minister Vajpayee and President Musharraf of Pakistan met in an effort to restart the peace process. The summit ended with no tangible progress. Talks on the peace process ended in October when terrorists bombed the Jammu and Kashmir state assembly and killed 38 persons. The terrorist violence continued on December 13, when 6 armed gunmen entered the National Parliament in New Delhi and killed 12 persons. The Government has accused the terrorist groups Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LET) and Jaish-e-Muhammad as the groups responsible of carrying out the attack on Parliament. In December a total of 22 persons were killed and 45 persons were wounded in Jammu and Kashmir, including 3 members of the LET and 3 Indian troops who were killed in a firefight.

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From:

a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life

Arbitrary and unlawful deprivations of life by government forces (including deaths in custody and faked encounter killings) continued to occur frequently in the state of Jammu and Kashmir and in several northeastern states, where separatist insurgencies continued. Security forces offered bounties for wanted militants. Extrajudicial killings of criminals and suspected criminals by police or prison officers also occurred in a number of states; in Uttar Pradesh, a state without an active insurgency movement, there were more than 150 deaths in police encounters in 2000. Militant groups active in Jammu and Kashmir, several northeast states, and parts of Andhra Pradesh, killed members of rival factions, government security forces, government officials, and civilians.

Official government figures indicate that militant activity increased notably during the year as security forces had killed 597 militants in encounters in Jammu and Kashmir as of September, compared with 1,520 militants killed during the same time period in 2000 (Kashmir has been at the center of a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan since the two nations gained their independence in 1947; both claim Kashmir). According to the Kashmir Times, security forces killed 1,239 militants in encounters in Jammu and Kashmir during the year. Kashmiri separatist groups maintain that many such "encounters" are faked, and that suspected militants offering no resistance are executed summarily by security forces. Statements by senior police and army officials confirm that the security forces are under instructions to kill foreign militants, rather than attempt to capture them alive. Human rights groups allege that this particularly is true in the case of security force encounters with non-Kashmiri militants who cross into Jammu and Kashmir illegally. According to press reports and anecdotal accounts, persons killed in disputed encounters typically were detained by security forces, and their bodies, bearing multiple bullet wounds and often marks of torture, were returned to relatives or otherwise were discovered shortly afterwards. For example, in January in Magam township approximately 6,000 persons gathered to protest the killing of 2 former militants whose mutilated bodies were found by civilians. The pair allegedly were detained by the Special Operations Group (SOG) of the Jammu and Kashmir police. The police denied any involvement and claimed the deaths were the work of the Hizbul Mujahideen, a Kashmiri militant group.

Nongovernmental organizations (NGO's) active in Jammu and Kashmir claimed that in January 2000, Mohammad Tahir Shah of Kapipora was killed soon after being taken into custody by security forces, which earlier had killed Shah's two sons, alleging that they were members of a militant organization. Shah was buried in Tral town. His relatives were not permitted to recover the body for burial in Kapipora, according to an NGO. Another NGO reported that in March 2000, security forces killed Gulab Muhammad Chechi in an encounter in Beerwah. Authorities claim that he was a foreign militant and that security forces killed him during a gunfight. However, his relatives state that Chechi was a beggar native to Beerwah.

On May 20, newspapers reported that Aijaz Ahmad Kitab had been arrested by the Jammu and Kashmir SOG. According to the police, Kitab was killed after he left the police station. Human rights groups and his family dispute this version of events and believe that he was killed in an encounter. No formal inquiry has been made into the circumstances of Kitab's death. In June the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), a government-appointed and financed investigative body (see Section 4), requested that the Chief Secretary and Director of Police of Jammu and Kashmir, as well as the Home Defense Minister, report within 8 weeks to explain these custodial deaths. By year's end, no such reports had been made public.

The NHRC, directed that all alleged encounter deaths be investigated immediately by an independent agency; however, members of the security forces rarely are held accountable for these killings. The NHRC itself may inquire into alleged security force abuses in Jammu and Kashmir but does not have the statutory power to investigate such allegations, if it is not satisfied with the responses to its inquiries. The authorities generally have not reported encounter deaths that occur in Jammu and Kashmir to the NHRC; however, private citizens have informed the Commission of various abuses. Human rights groups allege that during the year security forces killed a number of captured non-Kashmiri militants in Jammu and Kashmir. During conflicts with armed militants, security forces allegedly respond indiscriminately to gunfire.

According to the Kashmir Times, in Jammu and Kashmir security forces killed 1,239 militants during the year, while 901 civilians and 207 members of the security forces were killed. According to the Home Ministry during 2000, 543 civilians and 226 security force members were killed in insurgency-related incidents in the state. Home Ministry figures state that in 2000, 821 civilians and 356 security force members were killed in insurgencies in the northeastern states. In comparison, the Home Ministry reported that in 1999, 584 civilians, 439 militants, and 205 security force members were killed in the northeastern states.

In June a fact-finding team of human rights activists reported on a number of cases of extrajudicial killings in Pulwama, Srinagar, Badgam, and Baramulla districts and in Srinagar and Sopore towns. The team concluded that the police had acted without justification in most cases and that the Army had abused the protections of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act. They claimed that the Border Security Force (BSF) had fired indiscriminately on Magam village after a suicide attack on a BSF camp. The team also referred to the deaths of Ahmed Khan and Mohammed Ismail Kaloo as custodial deaths, refuting the security forces' explanations that they died in shooting encounters. In a precedent-setting decision, the Allahabad (the Uttar Pradesh High Court) affirmed in April that custodial killings are murders, and stated that police officers could in the future be prosecuted for failing to refuse to obey an illegal order which resulted in the death of a detainee or prisoner.

The security forces killed many civilians during military counterinsurgency operations. In July security forces killed six civilians following an attack on a convoy at Baramulla. In December 2000, 31 security force members were killed in encounters with militants, and 180 civilians were killed. For example, in December Amnesty International (AI) reported the killing by security forces of 10 civilians and the injuring of 40 others following an attack on an army convoy by armed militants. In February security forces reportedly fired into a crowd of villagers protesting the death of Jaleel Ahmed Shah. Five persons were killed and several persons were injured. A case was filed against the security forces for the unprovoked killing of villagers. As a result, the army apologized for the incident and promised an official inquiry; however, no security force members have been charged in the incident. In April 2000, the Jammu and Kashmir SOG fired into a group of several hundred Muslim protesters in Brakpora, Anantnag district, killing 8 persons and injuring 15 others. While some members of the police special operations group were indicted in connection with the killings, trials had not begun at year's end. An army-headed commission investigated the August 2000 Phalagam massacre in which 32 persons were killed by militants and reported in October 2000 that the Home Ministry's Central Reserve Police Force and the SOG of the Jammu and Kashmir police force used excessive force; however, there were no charges brought in connection with this use of excessive force.

Accountability remains a serious problem in Jammu and Kashmir. Security forces have committed thousands of serious human rights violations over the course of the conflict, including extrajudicial killings, disappearances, and torture (see Sections 1.b. and 1.c.). Despite this record of abuse, only a few hundred members of the security forces have been prosecuted and punished since 1990 for human rights violations or other crimes. Punishments ranged from reduction in rank to imprisonment for up to 10 years. According to AI, the army stated in January 2000 that it had investigated 822 of the 955 complaints of human rights violations that it received in 1999 and found that only 24 were of substance. AI reported that there were 1,143 deaths in police and judicial custody in the country in 2000.

In the past, scrutiny by the NHRC and international human rights organizations, when permitted (see Section 4), and the persistence of individual magistrates, resulted in somewhat greater accountability for abuses committed by security force members in Jammu and Kashmir; however, in July 1998, the Government rejected the NHRC's recommendations to bring the army and paramilitary forces under closer scrutiny by allowing the NHRC to investigate complaints of their excesses. In December 2000, the NHRC recommended the removal of paramilitary forces from the definition of "armed forces"; as part of the armed forces category, paramilitary forces are protected from investigation by the NHRC and from criminal prosecution for certain acts under various emergency statutes. No action had been taken regarding this recommendation by year's end. The majority of complaints during the year involved individual cases; while there have been complaints of individual houses being destroyed, there were no reports of entire villages being burned by armed forces or of mass killings, as in past years.

There were many allegations that military and paramilitary forces in the northeast engage in abduction, torture, rape, arbitrary detention, and the extrajudicial killing of militants (see Sections 1.b., 1.c., 1.d., and 1.g.). The Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the Disturbed Areas Act remained in effect in several states in which active secessionist movements exist, namely, in Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, Manipur, Assam, and parts of Tripura. The Disturbed Areas Act gives police extraordinary powers of arrest and detention, which, according to human rights groups, allow security forces to operate with virtual impunity in areas under the act. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act provides search and arrest powers without warrants (see Section 1.d.).

Human rights monitors allege that, as in Jammu and Kashmir, government reports of deaths during "encounters" between insurgent groups and security forces in northeastern states actually were staged, and that those insurgents who were reported dead were killed after being detained by security forces. The number of persons killed and injured in militant violence in the northeastern states is significant but is lower than the numbers killed in similar violence in Kashmir. From January to May 15, 225 killings took place in Assam. During the year, 19 members of the security forces, 101 civilians, and 69 militants were killed in the northeast. Numerous incidents of encounters involving security forces and militant organizations such as the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA), the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), and the United People's Democratic Solidarity (UPDS) continued. For example, on January 9, after an ULFA militant was killed and another injured in an encounter with security forces, four other militants from the ULFA were arrested. On June 6, security forces shot a militant allegedly responsible for killing three Catholic priests.

There continued to be many credible reports of extrajudicial killings by security forces, the army, and the police killed both militants and noncombatant civilians, particularly in areas of insurgencies. Human rights groups allege that encounters often are faked by police to cover up the torture and subsequent killing of both militants and noncombatants. On February 18, Azam Ali, a 38-year-old school teacher and activist belonging to the Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC), was killed in Nalgonda. Ali was killed while organizing a memorial meeting for Mr. Purushotham, another APCLC leader. Purushotham, an alleged former militant, a human rights defender, and Joint Secretary of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee, was killed by a group of unidentified men in November 2000. Purushotham was investigating alleged human rights violations by the police, including torture and extrajudicial killings. Police arrested four suspects a few days later, two of whom were identified as ex-PWG militants. The two persons confessed to the killing at a press conference that was organized by the police. The APCLC believes that the police, not the PWG, were involved in the killing. AI has asked the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh to order an impartial investigation into the killing of Purushotham and Azam Ali.

Another encounter occurred in Nalgonda district on June 9, when police surrounded a group of PWG militants. According to a human rights group, the police fired at the group and killed six PWG activists and one civilian. According to the police, the PWG militants were holding a meeting with local villagers and had fired on police officers who had approached the gathering; the police returned fire only when the villagers had cleared the area.

The NHRC is investigating 285 reported cases of encounter deaths allegedly committed by the Andhra Pradesh police in connection with anti-PWG operations. According to the Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee, the NHRC had evidence of police culpability in several cases. However, such cases have not been adjudicated in the courts or otherwise acted on by the state government. The Government's failure to act expeditiously on NHRC findings has discouraged local human rights groups from filing additional encounter death cases with the NHRC. As evidence that encounters often are faked by police, human rights groups cite the refusal of police officials to turn over the bodies of suspects killed. The bodies often are cremated before families can view them.

In Andhra Pradesh, the Disturbed Areas Act has been in force in a number of districts for over 4 years. Human rights groups allege that security forces have been able to operate with virtual impunity under the act. They further allege that Andhra Pradesh police officers train and provide weapons to an armed vigilante group known as the "Green Tigers," whose mission is to combat the Naxalite group in the state. Little is known about the size, composition, or activities of this group.

Court action in cases of extrajudicial killings is slow and uncertain. In one case Army Major Avtar Singh was arrested in 1998 for the 1996 killing of human rights monitor Jalil Andrabi in Kashmir. Singh and 11 countermilitants were charged with Andrabi's killing and 10 other unlawful killings. Criminal charges and a court martial still are pending against Singh, but neither process has yet begun. Human rights workers have alleged that the central Government and Jammu and Kashmir state government both attempted to subvert the judicial process by withholding evidence in the case. There were no developments in the 1996 killing of human rights monitor Parag Kumar Das, who allegedly was killed by a militant who previously had surrendered and was supported by the Government.

Police frequently use excessive force indiscriminately against demonstrators, killing citizens. For example, on August 6, police fired on demonstrators surrounding the Aurai police station in Muzaffarpur to protest police brutality against flood victims in Bihar; the shooting killed six persons and injured scores of others. On June 18, in Imphal, Manipur, police opened fire on persons protesting against the Government's ceasefire extension beyond Nagaland's borders. The demonstration took place soon after a mob burned down the legislative assembly. An indefinite curfew was imposed in Imphal, and the police were ordered to shoot anyone found violating the curfew, although there were no instance of persons being shot for this reason. Eighteen persons were killed in rioting that occurred over several days. In Chennai, Tamil Nadu, five persons were killed and dozens were injured on August 12 after police fired plastic bullets at demonstrators at an opposition rally, causing at least three of the deaths (the circumstances surrounding the other 2 deaths are unclear). The police action was condemned widely as being excessive. Several journalists also were injured, allegedly when police charged at the crowd with batons (see Section 2.a.). In Guwahati, Assam, in November, police responded to a riot at a school and shot at the mob, killing one man and injuring others.

During the year, there were reports of killings that resulted from police or other security forces who used excessive force. For example, the NHRC has sought an explanation from the army regarding the abduction and killing of a Changsan in Churachandpur, Manipur, by the Rashtriya Rifles in March 1997. The complaint was filed by the Kuki (tribe) Movement for Human Rights. In November 2000, the Manipur state government claimed that the victim died in crossfire between militants and soldiers. After reading the post-mortem report, the NHRC ruled that the victim's 14 bullet injuries could not have been sustained in this manner.

Some observers have alleged that it was a policeman who threw a grenade into the Charar-e-Sharif shrine in Srinagar on June 8, killing four persons and wounding many others.

On August 25, 2 policemen were sentenced to life imprisonment in Silchar, Assam for beating a teenage boy to death on August 24, 1996. On August 28, Asan Sheikh died of an apparent heart attack, according to jail authorities. However, the local Superintendent of Police stated that the possibility of foul play could not be ruled out, since blood stains were found on Sheikh's face.

Deaths in custody are common both for suspected militants and other criminals. According to the NHRC, there were 1,037 reported deaths in custody nationwide during the year, many from natural causes aggravated by poor prison conditions (see Section 1.c.).

The NHRC has focused on torture and deaths in custody by directing district magistrates to report all deaths in police and judicial custody to the Commission and stating that failure to do so would be interpreted as an attempted coverup. Magistrates appear to be complying with this directive, although states vary in their adherence to NHRC directives on custodial deaths. However, security forces are not required to report custodial deaths in Jammu and Kashmir or the northeastern states to the NHRC and do not do so. The NHRC reported 56 fewer custodial deaths from April 2000 to March 2001 than in the previous period. In January All-Parties Hurriyat Conference leaders criticized the state government of Jammu and Kashmir for a series of custodial killings. The Jammu and Kashmir Deputy Inspector General of Police denied that there had been any custodial killings, despite eyewitness accounts reported in local newspapers. In July Masood, a commander of the Hizbul Mujahideen, was killed by the SOG of the Jammu and Kashmir police following his arrest in Pampore, Srinagar. Masood's family allege that he was killed while in police custody. The police state that he was killed while trying to escape. There has been no formal investigation into his death. In June the NHRC asked for a report from the Home Ministry and Defense Ministry regarding media reports of custodial deaths. Despite the request, by year's end, the NHRC had not yet received a reply. During the year, the NHRC awarded compensation to Tejender Arora for an unlawful police beating in June 1999 in Uttar Pradesh.

During the year, there were several cases of suspicious deaths of persons in police custody in Maharashtra. In January an auto-rickshaw driver allegedly committed suicide in a Mumbai jail after being detained for a traffic violation. In August in Jalgaon Distict, the leader of a scheduled caste community was found dead at a police station the morning after he was arrested on a domestic violence charge. Citizens stoned local police when they denied the family the right to inspect the body. The District Collector has ordered an inquiry into the death.

However, during the year, the state government of Mahrashtra has taken some positive steps regarding custodial deaths. Following NHRC guidelines, the state government of Maharashtra mandated automatic post-mortem examinations and inquiries by a magistrate following all cases of custodial deaths. The district jail in Pune, the state's second largest, became the first in the country to adopt video-conferencing to help magistrates determine the health and well-being of persons in judicial custody (see Section 1.c.). In March the widow of Bharat Lokhande, a suspect who died in police custody in 1997, was awarded more than $4,000US (191,688 Rs) compensation by the High Court.

In August the state government took action to implement the Sri Krishna Commission findings concerning the Hindu-Muslim communal riots in Mumbai of 1992 and 1993. Former Police Commissioner Ramdeo Tayagi, indicted in 1998 along with other officials for killing Muslims during the riots, was arrested by an order of the Supreme Court. And in another long-delayed case, police inspector Manohar Kadam, indicted in 1997 for ordering excessive force against protesters in 1997, was arrested in September in Mumbai.

A member of the Kougatchi local authority in West Bengal, reportedly died of a heart attack in police custody on March 22. An opposition leader alleged that the local authority member died of torture while in police custody. To date, there has been no formal investigation.

In Bihar the NHRC recorded 135 custodial deaths in its 2000-01 reporting period. The Bihar government has not been responsive to NHRC directives and reports addressing police training and accountability. However, the Bihar Inspector-General of Prisons reportedly stated that of the 135 cases, only 15 were "unnatural deaths." Human rights sources claim that the number is slightly higher.

Killings and abductions of suspected militants and other persons by progovernment countermilitants continued to be a significant problem in Jammu and Kashmir. Countermilitants are former separatist militants who have surrendered to government forces, but who have retained their weapons and paramilitary organization. Government agencies fund, exchange intelligence with, and direct operations of countermilitants as part of the counterinsurgency effort. The Government also recruited countermilitants into the Special Operations Group of the Jammu and Kashmir police and into the Border Security Force. Countermilitants are known to search persons at roadblocks (see Section 2.d.) and guard extensive areas of the Kashmir Valley from attacks by militants. The Government, through its sponsoring and condoning of extrajudicial countermilitant activities, is responsible for killings, abductions, and other abuses committed by these militant groups. Perhaps as many as 3,000 countermilitants continue to operate in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly in the countryside, outside major towns. The Hizbul Mujahideen, a Kashmiri militant group, stated in June 1998 that progovernment countermilitants had killed 350 of its members. According to Pakistani newspaper accounts, Indian security forces killed 438 Pakistani members of insurgent groups in Jammu and Kashmir during 1999. Of this number, 200 were members of the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, 123 were members of the Al-Badr Mujahideen, 69 were members of the Harkat-Ul-Mujahideen and, and 46 were members of the Hizbul Mujahideen. However, these numbers have not been confirmed and only include the four largest insurgent groups in the state. The Kashmir Times stated that security forces killed 1,239 militants in the state during the year, compared with 1,520 in 2000.

Insurgency and increased ethnic violence took a heavy toll in the northeastern states. Extensive, complex patterns of violence continued in many of the seven northeastern states. The main insurgent groups in the northeast include two factions of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) in Nagaland; Meitei extremists in Manipur; the ULFA and the Bodo security force in Assam; and the All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF) and the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) in Tripura. The proclaimed objective of many of these groups is to secede from the country, creating new, independent nations. Their stated grievances against the Government range from charges of neglect and indifference to the widespread poverty of the region, to allegations of active discrimination against the tribal and nontribal people of the region by the central Government (see Section 5). The oldest of these conflicts, involving the Nagas, dates back to the country's independence in 1947. On August 1, 1997, a ceasefire between the Government and the Isak-Muivah faction of the NSCN (NSCN-IM) entered into effect. The ceasefire was extended in January until July 31. On June 15, the Government announced the extension of the ceasefire to cover all Naga-inhabited areas in the country. The ceasefire extension was to go into effect on August 1.

However, the Government's extended ceasefire was resisted in Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, where non-Nagas feared the eventual creation of a Greater Nagaland carved partly out of their territories. Protests in Manipur by the Meitei community were violent; 18 persons were killed, and the homes and offices of politicians and officials were burned. On June 18, large mobs marched on different parts of Imphal, the capital of Manipur. The mobs set fire to a number of buildings, including the legislative assembly hall, the chief minister's office, and the legislative speaker's residence. The All Manipur Students Union (AMSU) called on all 60 members of the state legislature to resign. In response to these disturbances, the Government revoked the extended ceasefire on July 27.

Surrenders by militants in the northeast, often under Government incentive programs, have been common in recent years. Surrendered militants usually are given a resettlement and retraining allowance and other assistance. In Andhra Pradesh, the state government offers a financial package to surrendered PWG militants, a program that has prompted hundreds of Naxalites to leave the movement in recent years. According to human rights activists and journalists, a few surrendered militants have been allowed to retain their weapons and are working for the police as anti-PWG officers, residing in police camps and barracks. Human rights groups allege that police use former-militants to kill Naxalites and human rights activists with close links to the PWG, although police attribute such killings to internal feuds within the PWG. There were 431 surrenders by PWG militants between January and August.

In Tripura a systematic surrender of arms by a faction of NLFT insurgents and NLFT fringe groups is due to the increased security pressure and to infighting within NLFT insurgent ranks. Since 2000 a few hundred militants have surrendered in small groups to the security forces, handing in their weapons.

Elsewhere in the northeast, Bodo-Santhal ethnic clashes, which began in 1998, continued throughout the year. More than 87,000 persons live under poor conditions in relief camps in Assam's Kokrajhar, Gosaigaon, and adjoining districts as a result of the ongoing violence between Bodos and Santhals. The killings of ULFA leaders' family members during the year renewed concerns about the situation in Assam. On January 4, unidentified assailants shot and killed three relatives of two ULFA militants, including two relatives of ULFA deputy commander in chief Raju Baruah. In addition, Avinash Bordoloi and two other Surrendered ULFA's (SULFA's) in Nalbari district were killed by ULFA militants. On June 25, five tribal militants were killed and several were injured during a series of encounters between NLFT and ATTF at Takarjala in Tripura.

Militant groups in Manipur, Tripura, and Assam continued to attack civilians. On June 24, three persons were killed and five others were kidnaped by NLFT militants in West Tripura when militants stormed into a village and dragged persons out of their homes.

During the year, in Tripura several persons were killed by the NLFT. For example, on June 4, NLFT members attacked a passenger jeep in which three persons, including a student, were killed. Communal tension rose following a tribal militant attack in which three Bengalis were killed and three were kidnaped.

In March suspected NDFB militants shot 7 non-Assamese in Kamrup District, Assam, and ULFA militants shot 3 persons in Nalbari District. In June NDFB militants shot 10 tribal woodcutters in Kokrajhar District, apparently because the cutters had defied an NDFB ban on tree falling in the area. In Assam on November 22, NDFB and ULFA rebels killed 11 persons and injured 7, when a bomb and a grenade were exploded in Sibsagar district. On the same day, NDFB militants shot 3 woodcutters belonging to a minority community in Palki Jhora village. In April 2000, United People's Democratic Solidarity (UPDS) militants lined up 11 non-Karbi laborers in the Dhansari Reserve Forest in Karbi Anglong district and shot at them. (The UPDS is a Karbi radical group fighting for greater autonomy for the Karbis; Karbis are tribal peoples native to Karbi-Anglong district.)

In Manipur 100 persons including 30 civilians, 57 militants, and 13 security force personnel were killed in clashes with militants during the year. The Manipur government declared a month-long ceasefire with militants in March, but 19 persons were killed in counterinsurgency incidents after the ceasefire went into effect. In Manipur 18 militant groups were reportedly active, including outlawed Meitei organizations. Exchanges of gunfire between security forces and insurgent groups occurs regularly.

In Tripura between January 1 and May 15, continued separatist-related violence resulted in the deaths of 132 persons including 89 civilians, 27 security force personnel, and 16 militants. On March 3, NLFT militants killed 11 CRPF personnel and 2 drivers of security vehicles in Bampur in Tripura.

Between January and May, there were 31 insurgency-related incidents in Nagaland in which 4 civilians and 17 militants were killed. The Government's negotiations with Naga separatists over a cease-fire caused significant unrest in Nagaland and in neighboring states. In one incident in June, police fired teargas shells into a crowd of more than 10,000 demonstrators who were protesting the extension of the Naga ceasefire beyond Nagaland's borders at Nambol in Bishnupur distict of Manipur; police also attacked demonstrators with batons. At least 35 persons were injured.

In the north-central states of Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, and West Bengal, clashes between police officers and Naxalite Maoist Revolutionaries of the Peoples' War Group (PWG) have occurred since the 1980's. On August 9, PWG members attacked two police stations and killed seven persons, including five policemen. The police sometimes respond with violence; for example, on January 24, an activist of the Communist Party of India Liberation Front was killed and five others injured with police fired on a procession of the Naxalite party in Gaya district of Bihar (see Section 2.b.). According to police, 89 Naxalites were killed in armed encounters during the first 8 months of the year. During the late 1990's, hundreds of policemen and suspected Naxalites were killed, according to press reports and human rights organizations. Twenty years of guerrilla-style conflict between state authorities and Naxalites have led to serious human rights abuses committed by both sides.

Militant groups in Jammu and Kashmir increasingly targeted members of the security forces and civilians during the year. According to the Kashmir Times, there were 931 attacks by militant groups against the police and security forces, resulting in the deaths of 515 personnel, compared with 384 deaths of police and security forces in 2000. The number of security personnel injured, but not killed, in these attacks was twice as high as for the same period in 2000, according to police sources. In January two civilians and four terrorists were killed in a suicide attack claimed by Lashkar-e-Tayyiba on the heavily-guarded Srinagar, Kashmir airport. On January 14, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah narrowly escaped injury in a grenade attack by Hizb-ul-Mujahideen militants in Srinagar. In March the Chief Minister alleged that killings of civilians and security forces by militants had increased during the Government's ceasefire. In June unknown assailants shot a political party worker in Budgam District, Jammu and Kashmir. In November four soldiers were killed and five were injured when LET terrorists attacked an army camp in Anantnag District, Jammu and Kashmir.

In August 2000, terrorists from Harkat-ul-Jehade Islami reportedly killed six Hindu villagers and seriously wounded seven in the Rajouri district in Jammu (see Section 5). According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), in August 2000, militants killed three elderly men and a teenage boy, and wounded two other persons when they fired automatic weapons at civilians in a village in Udhampur (see Section 5). Militants also carried out attacks on security forces that killed numerous persons (see Section 1.g.). In December 2000, six militants with concealed weapons entered Delhi's Red Fort, an historic monument that also houses an army unit, during a regularly scheduled sound and light show for the public. The militants opened fire on the crowd, killing a soldier and two civilians. The Lashkar-e-Tayyaba terrorist group later claimed responsibility for the attack. Also in December 2000, city police raided a Delhi apartment and shot and killed Abu Shamal, whom they claimed to be Lashkar-e-Tayyaba terrorist involved in the Red Fort attack.

Killings of security force members by militants in Jammu and Kashmir increased for the fourth year in a row. According to official statistics, 515 police and security force personnel were killed in the state during the year. The Ministry of Home Affairs reported that 397 security force members were killed in the state in 2000.

Nearly 50 persons were killed in violence related to the May state assembly elections and local elections in several states (see Sections 1.g. and 4).

Religious and ethnically motivated violence caused numerous deaths (see Section 5).

Mob lynchings of tribal people occur in many states (see Section 5).

b. Disappearance

According to human rights groups, unacknowledged, incommunicado detention of suspected militants continued in Jammu and Kashmir. In October the state government of Jammu and Kashmir stated that during the last 6 years, 2,250 persons were reported missing. The state government claimed that most of those who disappeared were young men who crossed into Pakistan-controlled Kashmir for training in terrorist camps.

The Ministry of Home Affairs reported that 645 suspected militants were arrested in 2000 and 104 persons surrendered. In comparison, according to the Jammu and Kashmir police, 744 suspected militants were arrested in 1999 and 109 persons surrendered. Human rights organizations allege that the decline in the number of militants arrested is consistent with reports that security forces are killing many militants captured in encounters (see Section 1.a.); that pattern continued during the year. Of those arrested and who surrendered in 1998, 529 persons were released after preliminary questioning, 457 persons were charged under special security laws, and the remaining persons were released at a later stage of judicial review. In addition the Jammu and Kashmir police stated that in 1998 it held 514 persons under the Public Safety Act (PSA). According to an AI report that was released in 2000, there were between 700 and 800 unsolved disappearances in Kashmir since 1990. The Home Ministry reported that security forces in the northeastern states arrested 1,383 suspected militants in 2000; an additional 2,057 militants surrendered during that year. In comparison, 1,413 suspected militants were arrested, and 1,080 militants surrendered in 1999. The Government was unable to provide complete statistics for the number of persons held under special security laws in the northeastern states, but acknowledged that 43 persons were in detention under the National Security Act as of 1998. Although the Government allowed the Terrorist and Disruptive Practices (Prevention) Act (TADA) to lapse in 1995, one human right organization credibly reported that more than 1,000 persons remained in detention awaiting prosecution under the law. Several thousand others are held in short-term (1-day to 6-months' duration) confinement in transit and interrogation centers.

Chundrakpam Ongabi Sumila reported to the Families of the Involuntarily Disappeared's Association (FIDAM) that on May 7, her husband was taken by armed men while the couple was waiting for their child's doctor. Her husband has not been seen since. The armed kidnapers are suspected to be Assam Rifles. When Sumila reported the incident to the police, she was told that her husband was suspected to have links with the Kangleipak Communist Party (KCP).

Human rights groups maintain that several hundred more persons are held by the military and paramilitary forces in longterm unacknowledged detention in interrogation centers and transit camps in Jammu and Kashmir and in the northeastern states that nominally are intended for only shortterm confinement. Human rights groups fear that many of these unacknowledged prisoners are subject to torture and extrajudicial killing (see Sections 1.a. and 1.c.). In August 2000, AI reported that the fates of up to 1,000 persons reported missing in Jammu and Kashmir since 1990 remain unexplained by authorities. The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture reported in 1997 that more than 15,000 habeas corpus petitions have been filed in the country since 1990, "but that in the vast majority of these cases the authorities had not responded to the petitions." In August 2000, AI appealed to the Government to investigate the growing number of disappearances in Jammu and Kashmir. At year's end, there had been no update on the case of M. Akbar Tantray, who was reported missing in February 2000. At year's end, the Union Defense Secretary had not issued a report on the whereabouts of Abudul Rashid Wani (missing since July 1997), as requested by the NHRC in February 2000. There were no developments in the 1996 disappearance of human rights monitor Jalil Andrabi, nor in the 1997 disappearances of eight persons in Jammu and Kashmir. As of December 1997, 55 cases of disappearances and custodial death still were pending against Border Security Force personnel in Jammu and Kashmir (see Sections 1.a. and 1.c.). In September 2000, the NHRC issued a notice to the Chief Secretary and Director General of Police in Jammu and Kashmir and the Secretaries of the Union Home and Defense Ministries requiring them to report on missing persons in the state within 8 weeks; however, there was no public information regarding the authorities complied with the directive.

The Government maintains that screening committees administered by the state governments provide information about detainees to their families. However, other sources indicate that families are able to confirm the detention of their relatives only by bribing prison guards. For example, in May 2000 the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) published an appeal by Sunita Majumdar, the mother of Partha Majumdar, who was taken from his home by police in District 24 Parganas, West Bengal, in September 1997, and has not been seen since. Police have provided no information in the case despite a request from the State Human Rights Commission. Partha Majumdar was a witness to an alleged police shooting that left one person dead. In May 2000, the State Human Rights Commission recommended that a criminal investigation be initiated against police involved in the incident. The state government of West Bengal has refused the Commission's request. A program of prison visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which began in October 1995, is designed in part to help assure communications between detainees and their families. During the year, the ICRC visited approximately 1,000 detainees in about 20 places of detention. All acknowledged detention centers in Jammu and Kashmir, and Kashmiri detainees elsewhere in the country were visited. However, the ICRC is not authorized to visit interrogation centers or transit centers, nor does it have access to regular detention centers in the northeastern states (see Sections 1.c. and 4). In 2000 the ICRC stated that it "encountered mounting difficulties in maintaining systematic access to people detained in connection with the situation in Jammu and Kashmir."

In Punjab the pattern of disappearances prevalent in the early 1990's appears to have ended. Hundreds of police and security officials were not held accountable for serious human rights abuses committed there during the counterinsurgency of 1984-94. However, steps were taken against a few such violators. The CBI claims to be pursuing actively charges against dozens of police officials implicated in the "mass cremations" cases wherein police in Amritsar, Patti, and Tarn Taran district secretly disposed of bodies of suspected militants. The militants are believed to have been abducted, extrajudicially executed, and cremated without the knowledge or consent of their families. The CBI in its report to the Supreme Court in December 1996 stated that Punjab police secretly had cremated over 2,000 bodies in Tarn Taran; of these, 585 bodies had been identified fully, 274 had been identified partially, and 1,238 were unidentified. Most reportedly were killed by Border Security Force officers while they were attempting to enter the country from Pakistan, were unidentified victims of accidents or suicide, or died in clashes between militant factions. However, 424 persons apparently were militants killed in the interior of the district, 291 of whom subsequently were identified. These numbers demonstrate the extent of the violence during those years and, given the pattern of police abuses prevalent during the period, credibly include many persons killed in extrajudicial executions. The NHRC is seeking to obtain compensation for the families of those victims whose remains were identified, but the Government has challenged the NHRC's jurisdiction in the cases. In September 1998, the Supreme Court upheld the right of the NHRC to investigate the cases. In August 1998, the Committee for the Coordination on Disappearances in Punjab (CCDP) member and former Supreme Court Justice Kuldip Singh presented the Chief Minister of Punjab with a list of approximately 3,000 persons who either were missing or had died in encounters with security forces during the period of unrest in Punjab. Former Justice Singh also announced that the CCDP would form a three-member commission to investigate the mass cremations. The Commission received little cooperation from state government authorities and made little progress during the year (see Section 4).

AI in its April 2000 report on human rights defenders in the country expressed concern that Punjab police officials continued to obstruct the judicial inquiry into the death of human rights monitor Jaswant Singh Khalra, hindering efforts to probe the Tarn Taran cremations. Khalra was investigating the cremation of unidentified bodies by Tarn Taran police. Several witnesses observed Punjab police officials arrest Khalra outside his Amritsar home in September 1995. Police officials subsequently denied that they had arrested Khalra, and he has not been seen since. One of the suspects in the arrest subsequently died, reportedly by suicide; none of the others were charged by year's end. One human rights organization credibly alleged that police intimidated a witness in the case in August 2000, threatening to kill him if he testified against them. These events prompted extended public debate over the accountability of Punjab police for abuses committed while suppressing a violent insurgency. According to human rights monitors in Punjab, approximately 100 police officials either were facing charges, were prosecuted, or were under investigation for human rights abuses at year's end.

There are credible reports that police throughout the country often do not file required arrest reports. As a result, there are hundreds of unsolved disappearances in which relatives claim that an individual was taken into police custody and never heard from again. Police usually deny these claims, countering that there are no records of arrest. On April 14, four persons were arrested and taken away by BSF officers in Churachandpur district. All four were arrested after an encounter between the BSF and militants, and were taken to an unknown location. The Manipur Human Rights Commission said there was no arrest memo, and the four had not been handed over to the police. The Commission lodged a complaint with the Director General of Police, and on April 23, the four were handed over to the police. At year's end, they remained in police custody. In Manipur 14-year-old Yumlembam Sanamacha of Thoubal district has been missing since soldiers arrested him in February 1998. The army reportedly detained him because of his alleged links with insurgent groups. There was a judicial inquiry into the Sanamacha case in 1999 in which the Army stated that Sanamacha had been arrested but later escaped.

Militants in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states continued to use kidnapings to terrorize the population, seek the release of detained comrades, and extort funds. Sometimes kidnaped persons later were killed (see Sections 1.a. and 1.g.). According to government figures, there were 1,369 kidnapings in the northeastern states during 2000. There were no significant new developments in the case of the 1995 kidnapings of American, British, German, and Norwegian nationals, despite police cooperation with foreign diplomats.

On January 28, Tripura police discovered the skeletons of four villagers who had been kidnaped by armed insurgents in 1999. No one has been prosecuted in connection with this incident. Also on January 28, armed NLFT militants kidnaped a villager who was a CPM worker from Dhalai district. On July 25, Parthapratim Roy Burman, the owner of one of Calcutta's leading shoe manufacturers, was kidnaped from a busy locality in the middle of the day. On August 5, armed militants kidnaped two executives, Sambhu Nath and Ram Avtar Chakravarty, of Binakandi tea estate in south Assam's district. On August 6, NLFT militants kidnaped 6 persons, including 2 tea estate officials from Rangrung tea estate in North Tripura.

In August, seven Hindu youths were kidnaped by militants in the Rajouri district of the Kashmir valley in Jammu and Kashmir. When security forces pursued their abductors, they killed 4 of the kidnapers, but 3 were able to escape with the victims. In a forest area of Doda district, a group of Hindu shepherds were kidnaped and killed by militants in August (see Section 1.a.).

c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The law prohibits torture, and confessions extracted by force generally are inadmissible in court; however, torture is common throughout the country, and authorities often use torture during interrogations. In other instances, they torture detainees to extort money and sometimes as summary punishment.

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture has reported that the security forces systematically torture persons in Jammu and Kashmir in order to coerce them to confess to militant activity, to reveal information about suspected militants, or to inflict punishment for suspected support or sympathy with militants. Information is not made public regarding instances of action taken against security force personnel in Jammu and Kashmir for acts of torture.

In February, a 30-year-old man from Surankot, Kashmir was detained by soldiers from the Rashtriya Rifles regiment on suspicion of terrorism. His legs allegedly had been set on fire and the skin peeled off by the soldiers. After his release, he was unable to walk home and had to be carried by his family. In other cases of arrest and torture were brought before the NHRC during the year, Gulzar Ahmad Ganie died of his injuries after his release from detention, and students Shiraz Ahmad Khan and Syed Malik both died after allegedly being tortured. Police abuses against indigenous people include torture (see Section 5).

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture noted that methods of torture included beating, rape, crushing the leg muscles with a wooden roller, burning with heated objects, and electric shocks. Because many alleged torture victims die in custody, and others are afraid to speak out, there are few firsthand accounts, although marks of torture often have been found on the bodies of deceased detainees. The U.N. Special Rapporteurs on Torture and on Extrajudicial Killings renewed their requests to visit the country during the year. The Home Ministry extended an invitation in April to the Special Rapporteur on torture, subject to certain limitations; by year's end, the visit had yet to be scheduled. The Home Ministry did not extend an invitation to the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings.

The prevalence of torture by police in detention facilities throughout the country is supported by the number of cases of deaths in police custody (see Section 1.a.). Delhi's Tihar jail is notorious for the mistreatment of prisoners, with 1 of every 11 custodial deaths occurring there. Police and jailers typically assault new prisoners for money and personal articles. In addition police commonly torture detainees during custodial interrogation. Although police officers are subject to prosecution for such offenses under Section 302 of the Penal Code, the Government often fails to hold them accountable. On March 13, a Mumbai district court ordered an inquiry into alleged torture of prisoner Yunus Fakir Mohammad Shaikh, who was detained by police at the Dongri police station. Yunus told the court, "My head was put underneath water, and I was assaulted with whips and lathis (canes). They banged my head against the wall." The doctor's report, obtained by a Mumbai newspaper, showed that Yunus's injuries were caused by a blunt instrument, not by a fall in the bathroom as the police claimed. During the year, no action was taken in this case. In Uttar Pradesh in March, the NHRC ordered the state government to pay $1,044 (50,000 Rs) compensation to Tajender Rajoura, who was beaten in an Agra jail after his arrest during a Congress Party protest march.

Police also tortured other citizens. On March 27, a local human rights group in Nanded District complained to the state's director general of police that on March 1, local police physically abused three local citizens who had questioned discrepancies in the post-mortem report of a 12-year-old rape victim. According to PUCL, in April a 14-year-old girl allegedly was abducted, tortured with electric shocks, and raped for 6 days by the Patiala police (see Section 1.g. and 5). At year's end, no police officer has been charged.

In its latest report on West Bengal, AI has criticized West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya for his comment in January that "the police should ruthlessly tackle criminals and see to it that the message of human rights does not get the better of them." In Uttar Pradesh in March, the NHRC ordered the state government to pay 1,044US (50,000 Rs) compensation to Tajender Rajoura, who was beaten in an Agra jail after his arrest during a Congress Party protest march.

There also were incidents in which police beat journalists (see Section 2.a.), demonstrators (see Section 2.b.), and Muslim students (see Section 2.c.). Police also committed abuses against tribal people (see Section 5).

The rape of persons in custody is part of the broader pattern of custodial abuse. Limits placed on the arrest, search, and police custody of women appear effectively to limit the frequency of rape in custody, although it does occur on occasion. According to The Times of India, a tribal woman alleged that she was raped by three Special Task Force personnel in October. She stated that the personnel forced their way into her home to obtain information about militants. In November, according to the Times of India, a High Court ordered an inquiry into an alleged custodial gang rape of a girl who had been arrested in connection with militancy. Mary Lushai alleged that three policemen raped her in Manu police station in Dhalai district. In September 2000, a 16-year-old girl suspect arrested on suspicion of petty theft was raped by two policemen in a police van in West Bengal. On February 2, the chief of the detective department submitted a report stating that the reported rape was "baseless and far from the truth"; however, the victim had become pregnant, reportedly as a result of the attack. In August, the girl was awarded $1,044 (50,000 Rs) as compensation by the divisional bench of the Calcutta High Court. However, the Government has not disciplined or charged the police officers involved in the incident, despite repeated requests from the court.

NGO's claim that rape by police, including custodial rape, is more common than NHRC figures indicate. Although evidence is lacking, a higher incidence of abuse appears credible, given other evidence of abusive behavior by police and the likelihood that many rapes go unreported due to a sense of shame and a fear of retribution among victims.

Human rights monitors allege that on July 19, 2000, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel raped a tribal housewife in Lamdam village, Manipur. They allege that the rape was committed in retaliation for an attack carried out on a CRPF patrol by People's Liberation Army militants the previous day (see Section 1.g.).

There is a pattern of rape by paramilitary personnel in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast as a means of instilling fear among noncombatants in insurgency-affected areas (see Section 1.g.), but it is not included in NHRC statistics because it involves military forces. According to an NGO in Kashmir, there were 200 rapes by paramilitary personnel in 2000.

From April 1998 to March 1999, the NHRC received 1,297 complaints of custodial death (1,114 in judicial custody and 183 in police custody), no cases of custodial rape, and 2,252 complaints of other police abuses. By 2000, the NHRC had not released the statistics of its actions against police during this time period. However, from April 1997 to March 1998, the NHRC received 1,012 complaints of custodial death (819 in judicial custody and 193 in police custody), 1 case of custodial rape, and 1,413 complaints of other police excesses. As a result of NHRC action during 2000, criminal prosecutions were brought against 43 persons; departmental action was taken against 60 officers, 51 of whom were placed under suspension; and monetary compensation in amounts ranging from $1,100 (50,000 Rs) to $2,100 (100,000 Rs) were recommended for payment in 20 cases.

According to press reports, prison officials used prisoners as domestic servants and sold female prisoners to brothels (see Sections 5, 6.c., and 6.f.).

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture stated in 1997 that, in Jammu and Kashmir, torture victims or their relatives reportedly have had difficulty in filing complaints because local police were issued instructions not to open a case without permission from higher authorities. In addition the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act provides that unless approval is obtained from the central Government, no "prosecution, suit, or other legal proceeding shall be instituted...against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers of the act." This provision allows the security forces to act with virtual impunity.

The Government occasionally uses excessive force in putting down demonstrations. Five persons died and dozens were injured on August 12 in Chennai in an opposition rally (see Section 1.a.). According to the police, three deaths were the result of police firing on rioters. Several journalists also were injured, allegedly in police baton charge (see Section 2.a.). The police action was widely condemned as excessive use of force.

The Government also occasionally uses excessive force against tribal people. In Gadchiroli on March 27, police claimed that they shot a Naxalite in the jungles of Maraknar when he fired at them. Human rights groups alleged that the man was not a Naxalite but a Madia tribal people who was out fishing, and that the police shot him in the leg while he was trying to run away, took him to the police station, and beat him to death (see Sections 1.a., 1.c. and 5). The witnesses to the incident were arrested by the police. On April 2, police shot and killed 5 tribal persons in Madhya Pradesh. The electronic media has highlighted these deaths and has reported that the police claim that the deaths occurred in an armed attack by Naxalites on government personnel, while local grassroots organizations say that the deaths were the result of a resistance to corrupt and brutal police by tribal persons. The Government of Madhya Pradesh has ordered an inquiry into the killing.

Police corruption undermines efforts to combat trafficking in women and children (see Section 6.f.).

Security forces killed and injured numerous militant group members, many in so-called encounter deaths, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states (see Section 1.a.).

Militant groups sometimes used automatic weapons, hand grenades, bombs, landmines, and other weapons in political violence in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states; numerous security forces and civilians were killed and injured.

Some militant groups in the northeast have used rape as a tactic to terrorize the populace; however, no cases are known to have been reported during the year.

Religiously motivated violence led to a number of deaths and injuries as well as damage to property (see Sections 1.a., 1.g., and 5).

Prison conditions are very poor. Prisons are severely overcrowded, and the provision of food and medical care frequently is inadequate.

Prisons operate above capacity because thousands of prisoners awaiting hearings (see Section 1.d.). The national average of persons awaiting hearings as a percentage of the prison population is over 60 percent. In Kashmir persons awaiting hearings make up 90 percent of prison population, and in Bihar 80 percent. Delhi's Tihar jail, with a designed capacity of 3,300 persons, houses 9,000 prisoners. Birsa Munda jail in Ranchi, Bihar, designed to hold 364 persons, houses more than 1,800 male and female prisoners. In May 2000, the PUCL visited Sakchi jail, Jamshedpur, Bihar, following complaints of abuse of prisoners. The human rights activists found that the prison, designed to hold 200 prisoners, housed 786 persons, of whom only 55 had been convicted; the rest were at various stages of the judicial process. AI reported that overcrowding in Arthur jail, Mumbai, led to rioting on June 19, 2000. Designed to hold 50 prisoners, Arthur jail has 180 inmates. Prison guards reportedly attacked inmates with razors and wooden poles to quell rioting that erupted following a fight between two prisoners. Forty inmates were injured in the incident. An August 3, 2000, report from Aizawl, Mizoram, stated that its central jail, designed to house 500 prisoners, had 846 inmates. The NHRC reported in February 2000 on its November 1999 visits to jails in Guwahati and Shillong. In Guwahati the commission found 780 inmates in a district jail designed to hold 507 (see Section 1.d.). In Shillong the commission found 374 inmates in the central jail, which was designed to hold 150 persons. One of the inmates was a 10- or 11-year-old girl awaiting trial. The Government prepared a national prison manual in 2000 to facilitate reform. It also continued to provide financial aid to the states. However, the Prison Act remains unamended. According to the SAHRDC, in the poorest states, such as Bihar, where 265 police stations have no lockup facilities, the lack of prisons led police to shackle prisoners to trees. Despite recommendations by the NHRC, no reform legislation has been passed to date.

The 910 deaths in judicial custody reported to the NHRC during the year, occurring in a prison population of approximately 279,000 persons, many of whom are held for years, include a large proportion of deaths from natural causes that in some cases were aggravated by poor prison conditions (see Section 1.a.). A study conducted by the NHRC found that tuberculosis was the cause of death in most deaths in judicial custody. Deaths in police custody, which typically occur within hours or days of initial detention, more clearly imply violent abuse and torture. The NHRC has no authority to investigate abuses by security forces directly, and security forces in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states are not required to report custodial deaths to the Commission. However, in January the NHRC requested that the Commission be informed of any custodial death within 2 months, and that a post-mortem report, magisterial inquest, and a videography of the post-mortem be provided to the NHRC.

In prison women are housed separately from men, in similar conditions. By law juveniles are to be detained in rehabilitative facilities; however, they are at times detained in prison, especially in rural areas. Pretrial detainees are not separated from the general prison population.

With the exception of an agreement with the ICRC for visits to detention facilities in Jammu and Kashmir, the Government does not allow NGO's to monitor prison conditions (see Section 4). However, 15 states and union territories have authorized the NHRC to conduct surprise check-ups on jails. Although custodial abuse is deeply rooted in police practices, increased press reporting and parliamentary questioning provide evidence of growing public awareness of the problem. The NHRC has identified torture and deaths in detention as one of its priority concerns. The NHRC's "Special Rapporteur and Chief Coordinator of Custodial Justice" helps implement its directive to state prison authorities to ensure that medical check-ups are performed on all inmates. In June 2000, the country's first women's correctional facility was opened in the Tihar complex in New Delhi.

d. Arbitrary Arrest, Detention, or Exile

The Government has implemented a variety of special security laws intended to help law enforcement authorities fight separatist insurgencies, and there were credible reports of widespread arbitrary arrest and detention under these laws during the year.

Although the law that had been subject to the most extensive abuse, the TADA, lapsed in 1995, 1,502 persons previously arrested under the act continued to be held as of January 1, 1997, in a number of states, according to the NHRC's 1996-97 report. Human rights sources estimate that about 1,000 persons remained in custody under TADA or related charges at year's end. A small number of arrests under the TADA continued for crimes allegedly committed before the law lapsed. In 1997 the Government asserted that every TADA case would be reviewed; however, few persons have been released as a result of the review. Criminal cases are proceeding against most of those persons still held under the TADA, with more than 3,000 charged under other laws in addition to the TADA. In 1996 the Supreme Court eased bail guidelines for persons accused under TADA, taking into account the large backlog of cases in special TADA courts. In 1999 the state minister for home affairs told the Jammu and Kashmir state assembly that 16,620 persons had been detained under the TADA in the state since 1990; of these, 1,640 were brought to trial and 10 were convicted. Approximately 10,000 other persons either were released or still were awaiting a trial. TADA courts use abridged procedures. For example, defense counsel is not permitted to see witnesses for the prosecution, who are kept behind screens while testifying in court. Also, confessions extracted under duress are admissible as evidence. The special task force established by the state police forces of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu to capture a bandit hiding in forests in the border area between the 2 states had arrested some 121 persons under the TADA prior to the law's lapse; 51 of these persons still were in custody at year's end.

In October a Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance was promulgated, under which detention without charge for 3 months is allowed, not disclosing information to the authorities about terrorist activities is deemed an offense, and extensive new powers to ban organizations and seize their assets are established. This ordinance is similar to the TADA in that it permits detention for 30 days without trial, summary trials, and the use of testimony exacted under duress. The NHRC considers new antiterrorism laws unnecessary, and opposition parties plan to block the ordinance in Parliament before it becomes permanent. Similar bills have been proposed in various state assemblies. If enacted, they would provide for special courts to try offenses, place the burden of proof at the bail stage on the accused, make confessions to a police officer of the rank of superintendent of police admissible as evidence, extend the period of remand from 15 to 60 days, and set mandatory sentences for terrorism-related offenses. In Madhya Pradesh such a bill, designed to combat the Naxalites, was pass early in 2000, was not enacted because it failed to receive Presidential signature. The Maharashtra state assembly enacted TADA-like legislation in November 1999. By year's end, the capital territory of New Delhi decided to adopt Maharashta's Control of Organized Crime Act.

The Constitution permits preventive detention laws in the event of threats to public order and national security. Under Article 22 of the Constitution, an individual may be detained--without charge or trial--for up to 3 months, and detainees are denied their rights or compensation for unlawful arrest or detention. In addition to providing for limits on the length of detention, the preventive detention laws provide for judicial review. Several laws of this type remain in effect.

The National Security Act (NSA) permits the detention of persons considered to be security risks; police anywhere in the country (except for Jammu and Kashmir) may detain suspects under NSA provisions. Under these provisions the authorities may detain a suspect without charge or trial for as long as 1 year on loosely defined security grounds. The state government must confirm the detention order, which is reviewed by an advisory board of three High Court judges within 7 weeks of the arrest. NSA detainees are permitted visits by family members and lawyers, and must be informed of the grounds for their detention within 5 days (10 to 15 days in exceptional circumstances). The Government was not able to provide figures on how many persons were being detained nationwide under the NSA, but in 1997 there were 1,163 such persons. The NSA does not define "security risk." Human rights groups allege that preventive detention may be ordered and extended under the act purely on the opinion of the detaining authority and after advisory board review. No court may overturn such a decision.

The Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA) covers corresponding procedures for that state. Over half of the detainees in Jammu and Kashmir are held under the PSA. Jammu and Kashmir police reported that 514 persons were being held under the PSA as of December 1998, the last year for which figures were available. Human rights groups say that the PSA's sweeping powers, combined with a prisoner's lack of access to family members or to a lawyer, lead to a recipe for abuse. On June 9, a series of detentions and arrests under the PSA followed protests over the killings of 6 women in Kashmir. Several members of the NGO Human Rights Front were detained for 1 day. Members of the Islamic Students League also were detained on the same day and place in preventive detention, and one student leader was ordered detained for 2 years. In addition, Dr. Hubbi, a member of the All-Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) also was detained along with two other APHC leaders. Other APHC activists allegedly were beaten by police at the demonstration.

The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). In a representation made to the NHRC, the SAHRDC asserted that the act's powers were "too vast and sweeping and pose a grave threat to the fundamental rights and liberties of the citizenry of the (disturbed) areas covered by the act." The SAHRDC asserted that the powers granted to authorities under Section 3 of the act to declare any area to be a "disturbed area," and thus subject to the other provisions of the act, were too broad. Moreover, the SAHRDC noted that Section 4(a) of the act empowers any commissioned officer, warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or any other person of equivalent rank in the armed forces to fire upon and otherwise use force, even to the point of death, if he believes that it is necessary for the maintenance of law and order. Further, Section 6 of the act states that "no prosecution, suit or other legal proceedings shall be instituted, except with the previous sanction of the central Government against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of powers" conferred by the act.

On June 30, 23,000 opposition party leaders and workers, mostly from the DMK party, were taken into preventive detention for 4 days in Tamil Nadu. Police organized the arrests to forestall civil disorder after the arrest of former DMK Chief Minister Karunanidhi on criminal conspiracy charges. Opposition leaders and human rights activists alleged that the roundup was unprecedented in scale and was intended to intimidate the opposition. The arrests led to the overcrowding of already congested jails. In Madurai Central prison, for example, 3,008 opposition figures joined 1,900 inmates in a facility designed for only 1,200 persons. Some of the opposition leaders taken into preventive detention were released after 4 to 5 days with no charges filed against them. None of these persons still are in jail following this mass arrest. In July the NHRC asked the Tamil Nadu state government to justify the arrests and explain apparent human rights violations. By year's end, there has been no repose to the inquiry.

Human rights groups allege that between June and August, 30 members of teachers' unions and other activist groups were detained by police in Warangel and Mahboobnagar on suspicion of PWG membership. Some of the detainees allegedly were tortured by police, and the teachers reportedly were ordered to resign from their jobs.

The Constitution provides that detainees have the right to be informed of the grounds for their arrest, to be represented by counsel, and, unless held under a preventive detention law, to appear before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. At this initial appearance, the accused either must be remanded for further investigation or released. The Supreme Court has upheld these provisions. The accused must be informed of the right to bail at the time of arrest and may, unless held on a nonbailable offense, apply for bail at any time. The police must file charges within 60 to 90 days of arrest; if they fail to do so, court approval of a bail application becomes mandatory.

The court system is extremely overloaded, resulting in the detention of numerous persons awaiting trial for periods longer than they would receive if convicted. Prisoners may be held for months or even years before obtaining a trial date. According to a reply to a parliamentary question in July 1994, more than 111,000 criminal cases were pending in the Allahabad High Court, the most serious case backlog in the country, of which nearly 29,000 cases had been pending for 5 to 8 years. A statement to Parliament in July 1996 indicated that criminal and civil cases pending before the country's high courts numbered nearly 2.9 million in 1995, roughly the same as in 1994, but an increase from 2.65 million in 1993. According to the Union Home Ministry, the total number of civil and criminal cases pending for 3 or more years in all courts throughout the country was 5,116,895 on December 1998. In its latest report, the NHRC reported that nearly 80 percent of all prisoners held between April 1996 and March 1997, were so-called "under-trials," i.e., unconvicted remand prisoners awaiting the start or conclusion of their trials. In its 1997-98 report, the NHRC stated that it "remains deeply disturbed by the presence of a large number of under-trial prisoners in different jails in the country." In March 1999, the chairman of the NHRC said that 60 percent of all police arrests were "unnecessary and unjustifiable," and that the incarceration of those wrongly arrested accounted for 43 percent of the total annual expenditure on prisons. The NHRC reported in February 2000 on its November 1999 visits to jails in Guwahati (see Section 1.c.). The Commission found that 90 percent of the 780 inmates were unconvicted prisoners awaiting completion of trial.

In May the NHRC ordered the Madhya Pradesh government to pay $6,500 (300,000 Rs) to brothers Manoj and Narendra Tak for their illegal detention in June 1998. The police had raided their house on a false complaint by Manoj's father-in-law. The Madhya Pradesh police took the brothers away to Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, where they were implicated falsely in a local robbery case. In April 2000, the Madhya Pradesh government instituted a departmental inquiry into the matter and found that the Gwalior police had tried the brothers on a false complaint and had misused police authority to settle private scores. In February 2000, the NHRC directed the Orissa government to pay $1,044 (50,000 Rs) as interim relief to a 16-year-old boy who was victim of illegal detention and torture by police at Kandhamal. Accused of theft, the boy was sent to a regular prison to await trial, rather than a juvenile home. In March the NHRC reported that it had directed the West Bengal government to pay $1,044 (50,000 rupees) in compensation to the court guardian of a 12-year-old girl who was in the custody of the West Bengal police for nearly a decade because she was the sole witness to her parents' murder. On July 9, Bihar police registered a case against then-Bihar Minister of State for Cooperatives Lalit Yadav, his cousin, and four others for alleged illegal detention and torture of a truck driver and cleaner at the minister's residence. The complaint alleges that Yadav kept the two men in wrongful confinement for a month, beat them, and tortured them. The two men's toenails allegedly were pulled out and they were forced to drink urine. Yadav was dismissed from his state government post and from his political party membership.

On November 28, 2000, the Government announced that it was allocating $108.15 million (5.03 billion Rs) to state governments for the creation of 1,734 additional courts during 2000-05, in order to hear more cases and reduce the number of remand prisoners. At year's end, 500 of these courts had been set up.

There were no political detainees reported during the year.

The Government does not use forced exile.

e. Denial of Fair Public Trial

The Constitution provides for an independent judiciary, and the Government generally respects this provision in practice. Under a Supreme Court ruling, the Chief Justice, in consultation with his colleagues, has a decisive voice in selecting judicial candidates. The President appoints judges, and they may serve up to the age of 62 on the state high courts and up to the age of 65 on the Supreme Court.

Courts of first resort exist at the subdistrict and district levels. More serious cases and appeals are heard in state-level high courts and by the national-level Supreme Court, which also rules on constitutional questions. State governments appoint subdistrict and district judicial magistrates. High court judges are appointed on the recommendation of the federal Law Ministry, with the advice of the Supreme Court, the High Court Chief Justice, and the chief minister of the State, usually from among district judges or lawyers practicing before the same courts. Supreme Court judges are appointed similarly from among High Court judges. The Chief Justice is selected on the basis of seniority.

When legal procedures function normally, they generally assure a fair trial, but the process often is drawn out and inaccessible to poor persons. The Criminal Procedure Code provides for an open trial in most cases, but it allows exceptions in proceedings involving official secrets, trials in which statements prejudicial to the safety of the State might be made, or under provisions of special security legislation. Sentences must be announced in public. Defendants have the right to choose counsel from attorneys who are fully independent of the Government. There are effective channels for appeal at most levels of the judicial system, and the State provides free legal counsel to the indigent. Defendants are allowed to question witnesses against them, present their own witnesses and evidence, and have access to government evidence held against them; however, under the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, preventive detention can be authorized for up to 180 days, effectively shifting the burden of proof to the defendant.

Muslim personal status law governs many noncriminal matters involving Muslims, including family law, inheritance, and divorce. The Government does not interfere in the personal status laws of the minority communities, with the result that personal status laws that discriminate against women are upheld.

In Jammu and Kashmir, the judicial system barely functions due to threats by militants against judges, witnesses, and their family members; because of judicial tolerance of the Government's heavy-handed antimilitant actions; and because of the frequent refusal by security forces to obey court orders. Courts in Jammu and Kashmir are reluctant to hear cases involving terrorist crimes and fail to act expeditiously on habeas corpus cases, if they act at all. There were a few convictions of alleged terrorists in the Jammu High Court during the year. Many more accused militants have been in pretrial detention for years. In April 2000, the Jammu and Kashmir Home Minister submitted a written statement to the state assembly acknowledging that 115 foreign militants (primarily from Pakistan, but reportedly also from Afghanistan and Tajikistan) jailed in the state and elsewhere had not been tried, despite the fact that many of them had been imprisoned for 10 years (see Section 1.d.).

Criminal gangs in all four southern states have been known to attack rivals and scare off complainants and witnesses from court premises, denying free access to justice. In some cases, accused persons have been attacked while being escorted by police to the courts.

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Independence of the Judiciary to visit the country during the year, but the Government did not grant the Rapporteur permission to do so.

There were no reports of political prisoners.

f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence

The police must obtain warrants for searches and seizures. In a criminal investigation, the police may conduct searches without warrants to avoid undue delay, but they must justify the searches in writing to the nearest magistrate with jurisdiction over the offense. The authorities in Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, and Assam have special powers to search and arrest without a warrant.

The government Enforcement Directorate (ED), which is mandated to investigate foreign exchange and currency violations, searches, interrogates, and arrests thousands of business and management professionals annually, often without search warrants. However, the ED ultimately convicts very few persons. According to official figures, in 1999, the latest year for which figures are available, there were 387 searches or raids by the ED, resulting in 107 prosecutions and 29 convictions.

The Indian Telegraph Act authorizes the surveillance of communications, including monitoring telephone conversations and intercepting personal mail, in case of public emergency or "in the interest of the public safety or tranquillity." Every state government has used these powers, as has the central Government.

In June the Information Technology Act was passed. The Act includes provisions that grant the police powers to search premises and arrest individuals without a warrant. Under the act, the maximum sentences for failing to provide information to the Government on request and transmitting "lascivious" material are 1 year and 5 years respectively. The act also requires Internet cafes to monitor Internet surfing and inform the authorities (see Section 2.a.). At year's end, one person had been arrested under the act, he was released after some confusion about the nature of the alleged offense. NGO's criticized the act, stating that its provisions were draconian.

The Government does not restrict citizens' personal appearance; however, in Kashmir and Manipur dress codes have been announced. The Kanglei Yawon Kanna Lup in Manipur has announced a dress code for the state's women that bans the wearing of saris, salwar kameez, and trousers. The group has threatened to punish with death women who violate the code and it urged women to wear the traditional Phanek and Chador on all occasions, but allowed girls to wear salwars as school uniforms. In Kashmir, the terrorist group, Lashkar-e-Jabba has ordered Muslim women to dress in burqas, Hindu women to wear bindis, and Sikh women to wear identifying saffron headscarves (see Sections 2.c. and 5).

g. Use of Excessive Force and Violations of Humanitarian Law in Internal Conflicts

Government forces continue to commit numerous serious violations of humanitarian law in the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir. Between 350,000 and 450,000 army and paramilitary forces are deployed in Jammu and Kashmir, although the Government does not release official figures. The Muslim majority population in the Kashmir valley suffers from the repressive tactics of the security forces. Under the Jammu and Kashmir Disturbed Areas Act, and the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, security force personnel have extraordinary powers, including authority to shoot suspected lawbreakers and those persons disturbing the peace, and to destroy structures suspected of harboring militants or arms.

The Union Home Ministry was unable to estimate how many civilians were killed in crossfire by security forces in Jammu and Kashmir during the year. The security forces continue to abduct and kill suspected terrorists, but they do not accept accountability for these abuses. Many commanders' inclination to distance their units from such practices has led to reduced participation in them and a transfer of some of these abuses to government-supported countermilitants.

According to credible reports, in addition to harassment during searches and arbitrary arrests (see Section 1.d.), security forces abduct and sometimes use civilians as human shields in night patrolling and searching for landmines; the abuses so far have occurred mostly in the Kupwara and Doda districts. Because of Doda's inaccessibility, the abuses there allegedly have been underreported greatly. In April in Danipora, South Kashmir, soldiers of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police told passengers on a public bus to move to the side from which they expected militants to fire. A woman was shot and her baby killed.

The incursion of Pakistan-backed armed forces into territory on the Indian side of the line of control in the state of Jammu and Kashmir resulted in an increased counterinsurgency campaign, accompanied by repressive offensive measures. According to a credible government source, as of early December 1999 over 450 militants had been killed since the Kargil conflict began. That trend continued, with reliable sources reporting that security forces had killed 1,239 militants during the year. In September 1999, then chief of army staff General Ved Malik said that security forces were killing 150 to 160 militants every month in Jammu and Kashmir.

Kashmiri militant groups also committed serious abuses. Militants carried out several execution-style mass killings of Hindu (Pandit), Sikh, and Buddhist villagers in Jammu and Kashmir (see Sections 1.a. and 5). Militant groups also killed police officers and members of the security forces. In January in Rajouri district, 15 persons were shot, apparently by militants, in their homes. Also in January, militants stormed a police control room in Srinagar, killing 8 policemen. In July a suicide attack by Lashkar e Tayyiba terrorists on an army camp in Magam, Kupwara District, killed five soldiers. Another Lashkar e Tayyiba attack on an army convoy in Khanabal killed four soldiers.

In addition to political killings, kidnapings, and rapes of politicians and civilians (see Sections 1.a., 1.b., and 1.c.), insurgents engaged in extortion and carried out acts of random terror that killed hundreds of Kashmiris. Many of the militants are not citizens but Afghani, Pakistani, and other nationals. Since the 1990's, the militants have made liberal use of time-delayed explosives, landmines, hand grenades, and snipers. Militants previously had restricted landmine use to army convoys traveling outside of major cities, but during the year they used command-detonated landmines in Srinagar city. There was a significant upsurge in militant violence against security forces, and a tendency to use heavy weapons such as hand grenades and rockets. Militants killed and injured numerous security personnel and destroyed a great deal of security force property; many civilians also were killed. On September 26, an explosion derailed 7 coaches of a passanger train, injuring 25 persons and seriously wounding 3. Twelve persons, including five assailants, were killed when a suicide squad stormed the Parliament in New Delhi on December 13. On October 1, 38 persons were killed in a suicide attack at the assembly in Kashmir by suspected Islamic militants. At least 30 persons, including 8 civilians, were killed by cross-border shootings on October 27 after militants blew up a police jeep, killing 5 officers. Four persons including a judge were killed on December 5 when their vehicle was ambushed by militants. In January 2000, a bomb explosion in a Srinagar market killed 16 persons, including 3 security force members. In March 2000, militants hurled hand grenades at a police patrol in Bandipora town, killing 3 civilians and injuring 11 others. In April 2000, a 15-year-old boy recruited by militants died in an explosion when he attempted to drive an expolsive laden car into army headquarters, Srinagar; four soldiers and three civilians were injured in the attack. In May 2000, four soldiers were killed when their vehicle hit a landmine planted by militants at Nihalpura village, Baramula district.

Extremist and terrorist activities in the Northeast also claimed many lives. In addition to ambushes, terrorists increasingly resorted to destroying bridges, and the laying of time bombs on roads, on railway tracks, and in trains. In April week-long fighting between 2 Naga insurgent groups left more than 45 persons dead; 4,500 persons were forced to flee 15 villages in Mon district (see Section 2.d.). In 2000 at Pahalgam, armed militants descended on a camp of Hindu religious pilgrims and fired automatic weapons at the pilgrims' tents, the unarmed civilians in the camp, their local porters and guides, and nearby army personnel, killing 32 persons, primarily unarmed civilians. In February 2000, Assam Minister for Public Works and Forests Nagen Sharma and four others were killed when suspected ULFA militants detonated an explosive device as the minister's vehicle passed a near Nij-Bahjani, Nalbari district. In March 2000, suspected ULFA militants attempted to kill a second Assam minister, Hiranya Konwar. They detonated an improvised explosive device as the minister's car neared Rongali Doegarh, Sivasagar district; no persons were injured in the attack. In May 2000, 5 persons were killed and 11 others were injured when militants threw a hand grenade into a passing jeep at Manikerbasti, west Tripura. Also on May 2000, UBLF militants lobbed bombs at a passenger jeep from north Maharanipur in Khowai, killing 5 tribal and injuring 11 others. The next day, 15 persons were killed when suspected NLFT militants threw hand grenades at Bengali villagers in Baghber village, Tripura. The militants then attacked villagers with machetes and set fire to 60 homes in the village.

In October, in Jarkhand state, Naxalites attacked a police station, killing 12 policemen and looting weapons. In February 2000, a Naxalite mine blast killed 21 persons in Bihar (see Section 5). In March 2000, Naxalites killed Andhra Pradesh minister for local government A. Madhava Reddy in a landmine explosion near Hyderabad. Reddy was returning from a political rally. As home minister in the state from 1994-95, Reddy had overseen anti-Naxalite operations. In a letter to the PUCL, G.N. Saibaba, general secretary of the All India People's Resistance Forum; Varavara Rao, executive member of the Revolutionary Writers Association; and Gadar, general secretary of the All India League for Revolutionary Culture alleged that police had summarily executed three unarmed members of CPI(M) on February 1. The three writers alleged that police detained the three victims--Kumar, Sujanta, and Venkanna--in Musmi village, Warangal district. The PUCL alleges that police killed five women in an April 2000, encounter in the Chandragiri Hills, Warangal district, Andhra Pradesh. According to the human rights organization, police surrounded the women and lobbed hand grenades at them, killing them.

During the year, police arrested numerous persons suspected of involvement in previous terrorist attacks and brought charges against some suspects. Charges also were brought against persons accused of involvement with human suicide bomb attacks to advance Sikh separatism, as well as against dozens of captured separatist insurgents in Jammu and Kashmir for bombings, killings, and acts of sabotage.

Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:

a. Freedom of Speech and Press

The Constitution provides for freedom of speech and of the press, and the Government generally respects these rights in practice; however, there are some limitations. A vigorous and growing press reflects a wide variety of political, social, and economic beliefs. Newspapers and magazines regularly publish investigative reports and allegations of government wrongdoing, and the press generally promotes human rights and criticizes perceived government lapses.

Under the Official Secrets Act, the Government may restrict publication of sensitive stories; nonetheless, while the Government at times interprets this power broadly to suppress criticism of its policies, the Government introduced a right to information bill in the 2000 Monsoon Session of Parliament. However, later in 2000 the bill lapsed; it was reintroduced and at year's end it was pending approval in Parliament. According the government press agency, Prasar Bharati, in the electronic media 90 percent of the channels are private, and 10 percent are operated by a semi-autonomous body which is controlled by the Government. In the print media, all publications are private. The wire services both are semi-autonomous.

The Newspapers Incitements to Offenses Act remains in effect in Jammu and Kashmir. Under the act, a district magistrate may prohibit the press from publishing material resulting in incitement to murder or any act of violence. As punishment the act stipulates that the authorities may seize newspapers and printing presses. Despite these restrictions, newspapers in Srinagar, the capital of Jammu and Kashmir, report in detail on alleged human rights abuses by the Government, and regularly publish press releases of Islamic militant Kashmiri groups. The authorities generally allowed foreign journalists to travel freely in Jammu and Kashmir, where they regularly spoke with militant leaders and filed reports on government abuses.

Journalists covering civil conflicts have been vulnerable to national security laws. During the year, the Prevention of Terrorist Ordinance (POTO) was promulgated again after having faced strong opposition when introduced in 2000. With the likely implementation of the POTO, journalists could face a series of problems. For example, the bill contains provisions that would compel journalists to tell authorities what they know of terrorist activities for face possible jail terms. Under the POTO, a journalist potentially could be jailed for an unspecified period of time for the refusal to reveal information about alleged criminal or terrorist sources. Like its predecessor, the TADA, the proposed bill would dispense with constitutional guarantees for due process, allowing for preventive detention. In Assam the state government has attempted to impede criticism by filing a number of criminal defamation charges against journalists.

The Press Council of India is a statutory body of journalists, publishers, academics, and politicians, with a chairman appointed by the Government. Designed to be a self-regulating mechanism for the press, it investigates complaints of irresponsible journalism and sets a code of conduct for publishers. This code includes a commitment not to publish articles or details that might incite caste or communal violence. The Council publicly criticizes newspapers or journalists it believes have broken the code of conduct, but its findings, while noted by the press community, carry no legal weight.

At the state level, regional political parties have the ability to censor regional media. In some instances, allegations of violence against journalists have been made against state governments. According to Reporters Without Borders, in July 2000, a magistrate in Sibsagar town, Assam, beat Parag Saikia, a journalist of the daily newspaper Aji. The magistrate reportedly had summoned the journalist for publishing a July 2000, article about the local authorities' alleged involvement in corruption. The journalist later was admitted to the hospital with various injuries. In July and August 2000, in the state of Andhra Pradesh, state police obstructed or attacked journalists and photographers in at least 10 different cities as they attempted to report on civil disturbances resulting from protests over power tariff hikes.

In Calcutta the CPI(M) often threatens journalists; however, as the power of the party diminishes, journalists find it easier to criticize the government. At least nine journalists in 2000 were injured while attempting to give a deputation to the director of information. The alleged assailants were state information officers, government employees owing allegiance to the Marxist government. In July 2000, alleged members of the CPI(M) severely beat a team of three reporters and a cameraman of ETV, a new vernacular cable television channel. Another reporter was injured severely in state finance minister Asim Dasgupta's constituency during municipal elections (see Section 3). On numerous occasions, CPI(M) supporters beat reporters of another Bengali cable channel, Khas Khobor. Earlier in 2000, CPI(M) officially requested its supporters to boycott the channel. The matter was resolved when a former CPI(M) activist replaced the editor.

Nonviolent pressure on journalists comes from official sources as well: the editor of the vernacular daily newspaper Naharolgi Thoudang was arrested in 2000 on charges of indulging in antinational activities. He was released after a court ruled that the allegation was baseless. In Assam a similar incident occurred as police intercepted the editor of the largest Assamese daily in April 2000, accusing him of having participated in a function organized by a militant organization. In April 2000, the Assam Human Rights Commission requested the police to report on the detention of Asomiya Pratidin editor Haider Hussain for visiting an ULFA camp in Bhutan; police detained Hussain in the first week of March. The Commission cited the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression; Hussain was released several days later. Some newspapers receive more than $1.29 million (60 million Rs) annually in advertising revenue from the state government. The threat of losing this revenue contributes to self-censorship by smaller media outlets, which heavily rely on government advertising.

The Government maintains a list of banned books that may not be imported or sold in the country; some-such as Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses"--because they contain material government censors have deemed inflammatory.

In the northeast part of the country, violence against journalists has become a problem and also results in significant self-censorship. The Asian Age reported on April 26 that a mob made up of members of Shiv Sainiks attacked special correspondent Vaibhav Purandare in Mumbai. The newspaper stated that the attack was without provocation. According to the CPJ, on May 10, 17 journalists were attacked by members of the Border Security Force (BSF).

The attack by the BSF left 11 persons dead, 8 of them civilians, and 3 journalists were hospitalized. The attack occurred in Magam, Kashmir, while the journalists were covering a funeral procession. The Associated Press reported that the BSF inspector-general apologized for the attack; the police investigation into the incident was ongoing at year's end. On June 20, Uttar Banga Sambad reported that two electronic media journalists were attacked in Malda by a contractor's agents while trying to take photographs of the work done under the supervision of the local governing body.

On June 26, two foreign journalists who had been detained by the Assam police for allegedly having met United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) militants in Bhutan were released. An official spokesman stated that they were detained for interrogation because there were reports that government they had met ULFA militants in an area where many militants are known to be located.

On June 27, Tamil Nadu police arrested Suresh, a Sun TV reporter, after he and other local journalists accompanied an opposition leader to a government storehouse. According to press reports, the journalist was charged with threatening the staff of the storehouse. After the arrest, 150 media workers were taken into custody while attempting to hold a demonstration demanding the release of Suresh. The government of Tamil Nadu released Suresh from prison on June 29, but the charges against him still are pending.

Intimidation by militant groups causes significant self-censorship by journalists. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, assaults on journalists in Kashmir decreased compared from past years, however the local press continued to face pressure from militant groups attempting to influence coverage. The state-owned broadcast media, generally viewed as sources for this dissemination of information by the federal government, remained a target. Militants fired three rifle-propelled grenades at the national Doordarshan television (DDTV) network in Srinagar, on March 18 and detonated a bomb outside the compound of Radio Kashmir on April 15. No one was injured in these incidents. On May 23, Tripura Darpan reported that the house of Mrinal Shara, a correspondent for an Assamese daily, was attacked by a group of armed youths who threatened him for his reporting.

Pradeep Bhatia, a photographer for the national daily The Hundustan Times, was killed in Srinagar on August 10 in a bombing explosion carried out by the Kashmiri group Hizb-ul-Mujahideen. However, a Hizb-ul-Mujahideen spokesman claimed that the attack was aimed at the Indian security forces and expressed regret over Bhatia's death.

According to the CPJ, in January 2000, English-language newspapers throughout Gujarat received written notice from the Bajrang Dal, a radical Hindu nationalist group, threatening them with dire consequences if they continued to publish exaggerated reports of anti-Christian violence (see Sections 2.c. and 5). In 1999 Kashmiri militant groups threatened journalists and editors and even imposed temporary bans on some publications that were critical of their activities.

On July 5, a Bengali-language daily in Guwaati reported that an employee of Aajir Asam newspaper was beaten severely by police while he was returning home from his office. On August 12, 12 members of the press were injured when police charged them with batons while they were reporting on a DMK rally. According to local news reports, the police also destroyed cameras and film owned by the photographers who recorded the incident. The government of Tamil Nadu and the Press Council of India ordered an investigation into the incident by a Joint Commissioner.

In July 2000, V. Selvaraj, a journalist with the biweekly Nakkeeran, was shot and killed in Perambalur, Tamil Nadu. Thirteen persons were charged in connection with Selvaraj's killing. A motive for the killing has not been established; however, local police maintain that there was personal enmity between Selvaraj and his 13 assailants. The trial had not begun by year's end.

Television no longer is a government monopoly, but this is due more to technological changes than to government policy. Private satellite television is distributed widely by cable or dish in middle-class neighborhoods throughout the country. These channels have been providing substantial competition for DDTV, the national broadcaster, in both presentation and credibility because DDTV frequently is accused of manipulating the news for the benefit of the Government; however, cable operators are not free of criticism. In some parts of the country, to varying degrees, satellite channel owners use their medium to promote the platforms of the political parties that they support.

Certain government measures to control objectionable content on satellite channels--specifically, tobacco and alcohol advertisements-are still in effect and hold cable distributors liable under civil law. Cable operators in New Delhi and some other areas held a 3-day blackout during the Olympic Games in 2000 to demonstrate their concern over the measures. The Government since has clarified its position, stating that the (often foreign) satellite broadcasters, rather than the domestic cable operators, fall within the scope of the regulation.

AM radio broadcasting remains a government monopoly. Private FM radio station ownership was legalized during 2000, but licenses only authorize entertainment and educational content. Licenses do not permit independent news broadcasting.

A government censorship board reviews films before licensing them for distribution. The board censors material deemed offensive to public morals or communal sentiment. In 2000 Hindu fundamentalist groups resorted to violence and disrupted the shooting of "Water," a film involving the exploitation of widows, as they claimed it offended Hindu sentiments. Producers of video newsmagazines that appear on national television are required to submit their programs to DDTV which occasionally has censored stories that portrayed the Government in an unfavorable light. This has led to self-censorship among producers, so that DDTV rarely has to exercise its power of censorship.

The Government limits access to the Internet. The Informational Technology Act, passed in May 2000, provides for censoring information on the Internet on public morality grounds, and it considers "unauthorized access to electronic information" a crime. According to Reporters Without Borders, this law allows police officers to search the homes or offices of Internet users, at any time and without a warrant. Anyone running an "anti-Indian" site risks up to five years in prison. In March 2000, Sikhbir Singh Osan lost his press accreditation because a web site he allegedly ran provided information about Sikhs community and reports on human rights abuses against the Sikhs. During the monsoon session of parliament, the Government introduced a Convergence Communication Bill that seeks to set up a common regulatory body for telecommunication, information technology, and broadcasting. The bill was referred to a select committee of Parliament and has yet to be passed.

Academic freedom is not restricted, and students and faculty espouse a wide range of views. In addition to about 10 national universities and 256 state universities, states are empowered to accredit locally run private institutions.

b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association

The Constitution provides for the right of peaceful assembly, and the Government generally respected this right in practice. The authorities sometimes require permits and notification prior to holding parades or demonstrations, but local governments ordinarily respect the right to protest peacefully, except in Jammu and Kashmir, where separatist parties routinely are denied permits for public gatherings. During periods of civil tension, the authorities may ban public assemblies or impose a curfew under the Criminal Procedure Code.

Srinagar and other parts of Jammu and Kashmir occasionally came under curfew, but more often were affected by strikes called by militants.

On February 2, eight tribal villagers were killed when police fired on a group of persons protesting against the Koel-Karo dam project. The state government ordered an inquiry into the incident (see Section 5). In June two tribal activists were killed after police fired on a group protesting the partisan attitude of the local police in a molestation case (see Section 1.c.). While the police claim that the demonstrators were armed and attacked police, local human rights activists allege that they were peaceful and unarmed.

In March 2000, Calcutta police beat primary school teachers participating in a peaceful procession to the legislative assembly, after holding a meeting on demands they had made of the state government. On August 13 and 14, 2000, police killed two persons and injured three others after they fired on a crowd of 1,500 Muslims in Agra. The crowd had gathered to protest efforts by majority Hindus to prevent them from using a plot of land close to a Hindu temple. The minority community wanted to use the land, which was under the supervision of Muslim religious authorities, as a graveyard. Police allege that the protesters turned violent, throwing bombs and bottles filled with acid at police. The police maintain that they fired at the crowd with live ammunition only after efforts to quell the disturbance with tear gas and rubber bullets had failed. Some of the protesters told reporters that the police actions were unprovoked (see Sections 1.a. and 1.g.).

According to AI, in August 2000 the Gujarat government detained approximately 600 persons who were planning to attend a hearing on the Narmada dam (see Section 2.d.). The police charged the protestors with disturbing the peace and released them shortly after their arrests.

The Constitution provides for the right to form associations, and the Government generally respected this right in practice.

In 1999 the Government introduced and enforced a new requirement that NGO's secure the prior approval of the Ministry of Home Affairs before organizing international conferences. Human rights groups contend that the requirement provides the Government with substantial political control of the work of NGO's, abridging of their freedom of assembly and association.

c. Freedom of Religion

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the Government generally respects this right in practice; however, it sometimes does not act effectively to counter societal attacks against religious minorities and attempts by state and local governments to limit religious freedom. India is a secular state in which all faiths generally enjoy freedom of worship; government policy does not favor any religious group. However, tension between Muslims and Hindus, and to an increasing extent between Hindus and Christians, continues to pose a challenge to the secular foundation of the State (see Section 5). In addition governments at state and local levels only partially r