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. Members of the security forces committed numerous serious human rights abuses; however, some officers from the security forces were held accountable for their actions during the year.

The country was in transition from a government-controlled to a largely market-oriented economy. The private sector was predominant in agriculture, most non-financial services, consumer goods manufacturing, and some heavy industrial sectors. Economic liberalization and structural reforms begun in 1991 continued, although momentum slowed. The country's economic problems were compounded by a population growth rate of 1.7 percent annually and a population of more than 1.2 billion. Income distribution remained very unequal, with the top 20 percent of the population receiving 46.1 percent of national income and the bottom 20 percent receiving 8.1 percent. According to a government survey, 16.6 percent of the urban population and 18.6 percent of the rural population lived below the poverty level.

The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, numerous serious problems remained. Significant human rights abuses included: Extrajudicial killings, including faked encounter killings, custodial deaths 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 without charge; 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; forced prostitution; child prostitution and female infanticide; discrimination against persons with disabilities; serious discrimination and violence against indigenous people and scheduled castes and tribes; widespread intercaste and communal violence; religiously motivated violence against Muslims and Christians; widespread exploitation of indentured, bonded, and child labor; and trafficking in women and children.

These abuses were 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 were most visible 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.

Terrorist attacks remained problems. The concerted campaign of execution-style killings of civilians by Kashmiri and foreign-based militant groups continued and included several killings of political leaders and party workers. Separatist guerrillas were responsible for numerous, serious abuses, including killing of armed forces personnel, police, government officials, and civilians; torture; rape; and other forms of brutality. Separatist guerrillas also were responsible for kidnapping and extortion in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states. The Government accused the terrorist organizations Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) of responsibility for carrying out many of the attacks on civilians and military personnel. The Government has also expanded construction of a security barrier along the International Border and Line of Control (LoC), causing difficulties for Kashmiris and Pakistanis. The Government claimed that the barrier was necessary to prevent terrorism, but the construction process also affected farming and other activities of nearby residents.

Tension along the Line of Control between Pakistan and Indian-held Kashmir was high during the year, and there was shelling in several sectors; however, in November, the country and Pakistan announced a ceasefire. By all accounts, the ceasefire continued at year's end.

There were significantly fewer attacks by militants in Jammu and Kashmir during the year; however, it continued at the level of the late 1990s, according to the Home Ministry (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.) In Jammu and Kashmir, according to the Home Ministry, security forces killed 1,526 militants during the year, compared with 1,747 militants killed during the same period in 2002. In addition, human rights groups alleged that during the year security forces killed a number of captured non-Kashmiri militants in Jammu and Kashmir. Kashmiri separatist groups claimed that in many instances "encounters" were faked and that security forces summarily executed suspected militants and civilians offering no resistance. Human rights activists alleged that the security forces were under instructions to kill foreign militants, rather than attempt to capture them alive, in the case of security encounters with non-Kashmiri terrorists who infiltrated 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, often bearing multiple bullet wounds and marks of torture, were returned to relatives or otherwise were discovered shortly afterwards. For example, in May, Mohammed Ashraf Malik was taken into custody by the Rashtriya Rifles (RR) allegedly for assisting the guerrillas. Several days later, the RR unit advised Malik's family to collect his remains from the forest, claiming that he had stepped on a landmine. By year's end, an inquiry had been ordered in this case.

There reportedly was no action taken against members of the security forces responsible for the following killings in Jammu and Kashmir: The January 2002 "encounter" killing of Ali Muhammad Bhat, and the March 2002 alleged custody killing of Mubarak Shah in Dushar Gool.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) asked the Uttar Pradesh government to pay $10,000 (500,000 Rs) to the family of Dr. Sonali Bose, a graduate student shot by the police in July 2002 in an alleged case of mistaken identity.

The Jammu and Kashmir state government took numerous initiatives to hold violators of human rights accountable. In June, the Government announced that 118 of the security forces had been punished for having committed human rights violations, including 44 Border Security Force (BSF) members, 47 from the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), and 27 police officers. A Senior Superintendent of Police was suspended by the Jammu and Kashmir government for allegedly falsifying the DNA samples of five civilians killed in fake encounters in Chattisingpora, Anantnag District in March 2000; he was appealing his case at year's end. A ministerial subcommittee headed by the Deputy Chief Minister had recommended severe punishment for three police officers and two doctors for tampering with the evidence.

The security forces also killed many civilians during military counterinsurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir. A December Amnesty International (AI) paper indicated that security forces had reportedly killed over 250 civilians during the year. According to the Home Ministry, security forces killed 28 civilians from April 1 until June 30, and the NHRC recommended payment of compensation in 11 of these cases.

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, allowed 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.).

Accountability remained a serious problem in Jammu and Kashmir. Security forces committed thousands of serious human rights violations over the course of the 14-year 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. In a December letter to Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, AI wrote "the state government needs to be seen to make the security forces more accountable for their actions."

Violence, often resulting in deaths, was a pervasive element in Jammu and Kashmir politics (see Section 3). According to the Jammu and Kashmir Director General of Police, shootings, explosions, and suicide attacks killed more than 2,714 persons during the year. More than 836 civilians, 384 security personnel, and 1,494 militants were killed in politically motivated violence during the year. Supporters of different political parties, and supporters of different factions within one party, frequently clashed with each other and with police during the election.

Country-wide, there were allegations that military and paramilitary forces engaged in abduction, torture, rape, arbitrary detention, and the extrajudicial killing of militants and noncombatant civilians, particularly in areas of insurgencies (see Sections 1.b., 1.c., 1.d., and 1.g.). Human rights groups alleged that police often faked encounters to cover up the torture and subsequent killing of both militants and noncombatants.

The number of persons killed and injured in militant violence in the northeastern states was significant but was much lower than the numbers killed in similar violence in Jammu and Kashmir. The Home Ministry reported that during the first half of the year, more than 738 militant attacks occurred in the Northeastern states resulting in 503 casualties and 437 kidnappings, while 271 militants surrendered. 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.

The trial in the case of People's War Group (PWG) guerrillas charged with the 2001 killing of human rights activist Purushotham was ongoing at year's end. During the year, the trial in the case of persons charged with the 2001 killing of human rights activist Azam Ali was concluded, and the defendants were found not guilty.

As evidence that encounters often were faked by police, human rights groups cited the refusal of police officials to turn over the bodies of suspects killed. The bodies often were cremated before families could view them. In July, the NHRC reported that an encounter death occurred after the Andhra Pradesh police detained two suspected PWC members. No further action was taken by year's end.

During the year, in Andhra Pradesh, the Disturbed Areas Act was not in force. Human rights groups alleged that security forces were able to operate with virtual impunity under the act. They further alleged that Andhra Pradesh police officers trained and provided weapons to an armed vigilante group known as the "Green Tigers," whose mission was to combat the Naxalite group in the state. Little was known about the size, composition, or activities of this group.

Court action in cases of extrajudicial killings were widely criticized as slow and inconsistent. For example, there was no action taken, nor was any likely, for persons responsible for the 1996 killings of Jalil Andrabi and Parag Kumar Das.

Police frequently used excessive force indiscriminately against demonstrators, killing citizens (see Section 2.b.).

Although the Supreme Court in July 2002 ordered regular checks on police stations to ascertain the incidence of custodial violence against persons, the government and local authorities failed to comply in the overwhelming majority of police stations throughout the country; however, the checks were conducted in a very small number of police stations in Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal.

Deaths in custody were common both for suspected militants and other criminals. According to the NHRC, there were 1,305 reported deaths in custody nationwide during 2001, the latest year for which data were available. In December, the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister reported that there were 8 custodial deaths in Jammu and Kashmir during the year, compared to 11 in 2001. Many died from natural causes aggravated by poor prison conditions (see Section 1.c.).

There were reports of deaths in custody that resulted from alleged torture or other abuse. For example, in January, 28-year-old Ramesh died in police custody in Karnataka, allegedly after having been tortured. Human rights organizations questioned the legality and severity of the police actions. Two policemen were suspended but were not arrested or charged.

In June, the Jammu and Kashmir state government dismissed a deputy superintendent of police for his role in the 1999 custodial deaths of three persons.

The NHRC 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 appeared to be complying with this directive, although states varied in their adherence to NHRC directives on custodial deaths.

During the year, some state governments took some measures regarding custodial deaths. In May, the Jammu and Kashmir Human Rights Commission directed the central government to pay $10,000 (500,000 Rs) to the parents of Hilal Ahmed Nasti who died in custody. Following NHRC guidelines, the Government announced plans to address deficiencies in the prison system and establish a committee to draft a model prisons manual. The committee circulated its draft to all state governments/union territories for their input, but has not given a timeline for final publication.

In Bihar, the NHRC recorded 144 custodial deaths in its 2001-2002 reporting period. According to the NHRC, the Bihar government had not adequately responded to NHRC directives and reports addressing police training and accountability. However, the Bihar Inspector General of Prisons reportedly stated that of the 144 cases, only 15 were "unnatural deaths." Human rights sources claimed that the number was higher. The NHRC Chairperson stated that Bihar had the second highest number of human rights violations in the country, but it had not yet formed a State Human Rights Commission.

Killings and abductions of suspected militants and other persons by progovernment countermilitants continued to be a significant problem in Jammu and Kashmir. Countermilitants were members of police auxiliary units consisting of former separatists who surrendered to government forces, but who retained their weapons and paramilitary organization. Government agencies funded, exchanged intelligence with, and directed the operations of countermilitants as part of the counterinsurgency effort. Allegations of violations by the Special Operations Group (SOG), special anti-insurgency police units which in the past have operated outside the law, continued throughout the year. For example, on November 12, the SOG entered the home of Bashir Ahmad Sheikh, who was allegedly killed in an "encounter" in July, and beat his mother and sisters. In March, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mufti Muhammed Sayeed told the Legislative Assembly that the SOG was disbanded; however, at year's end, there has been no sign that disbandment of the SOG had taken place. SOG members who earlier acted independently had been subordinated to regular police units. Fifty-three members of the SOG had been charged with human rights violations and 25 were removed from duty but have not been arrested or charged with any crime. In December, there were reports of protests in several districts in Jammu and Kashmir after former SOG members were appointed to positions in the uniformed police. Countermilitants searched persons at roadblocks (see Section 2.d.) and guarded large areas of the Kashmir Valley. The Government, through its sponsoring and condoning of extrajudicial countermilitant activities, was responsible for killings, abductions, and other abuses committed by these groups. According to journalists in Srinagar, as many as 1,200 countermilitants continued to operate in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly in the countryside.

Surrenders by militants in the northeast, often under government incentive programs, continued during the year. Surrendered militants usually were given a resettlement and retraining allowance and other assistance. According to human rights activists and journalists, a few surrendered militants were allowed to retain their weapons and were working for the police as anti-PWG officers, residing in police camps and barracks. Human rights groups alleged that police used former militants to kill Naxalites and human rights activists with close links to the PWG, although police attributed such killings to internal feuds within the PWG. Several hundred PWG militants surrendered during the year. In February, the Home Ministry held several rounds of talks with the state government of Andhra Pradesh and a representative of the PWG Group. In June 2002, the group withdrew from those talks following a police encounter.

In Tripura, the systematic surrender of arms by a faction of NLFT insurgents and NLFT fringe groups continued, due to the increased security pressure and to infighting within NLFT insurgent ranks.

The killings of ULFA leaders' family members by unknown persons during the year renewed concerns about the situation in Assam. For example, In January 2002, unidentified assailants shot and killed three relatives of two ULFA militants, including two relatives of ULFA deputy commander in chief Raju Baruah. More than 87,000 persons lived under poor conditions in relief camps in Assam as a result of the ongoing violence (see Section 2.d.).

Militant groups continued to attack civilians. For example, in August unknown persons killed 52 persons by detonation of a car bomb in Bombay.

In Manipur 15 civilians, 34 militants and 15 security force personnel were killed in clashes with the militants during the year. In January, one child was killed and one person was injured when the border security forces allegedly fired into a home. In July, two security force members were killed and Chief Minister O. Ibibi Singh was shot allegedly by the People's Liberation Army in Manipur. Nobody was arrested in connection with this incident. In Manipur, 18 militant groups reportedly were active, including outlawed Meitei organizations.

In Tripura, the Chief Minister reported 1150 separatist-related deaths from 1999 until 2003. Of the 1150 killings, 193 took place during the year. For example, on May 7, 19 non-tribal villagers were killed by tribal militants in Tripura. NGOs speculated that the All India Tripura Tiger Force was responsible.

The South Asia Terrorism Portal reported that 17 persons were killed in clashes with militants in Nagaland during the year. Throughout the year, talks continued between various Naga separatists and central and state government officials, and human rights groups observed that violence had decreased; however, violent clashes between NSCN-IM and police officers continued. For example, in April security forces shot and killed one NSCN-IM member and arrested two others. On July 31, the Government extended for an additional year the ceasefire with militants; however, the Government's continued negotiations with Naga separatists over a cease-fire caused significant unrest in neighboring states.

In the north-central states of Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, and West Bengal, clashes between police officers and the PWG continued. The police sometimes responded with violence. For example, on September 8, 11 police personnel and a civilian were killed in a landmine explosion allegedly set by the PWG in Bihar. Twenty years of guerrilla-style conflict between state authorities and Naxalites led to serious human rights abuses committed by both sides.

Killings of security force members by militants in Jammu and Kashmir declined to 381 during the year, according to the Home Ministry.

During the year, militant groups in Jammu and Kashmir targeted civilians, members of the security forces, and politicians. According to the Home Ministry, militants had killed 808 civilians during the year, compared with 967 in 2002. For example, in April several soldiers were killed by militants in Srinagar when a bomb detonated at the entrance of the state-run television and radio station.

Authorities prosecuted militants engaged in violence. For instance, in January, one person was convicted for the December 2000 killing of a soldier and two civilians at Delhi's Red Fort. The trial of seven others continued at year's end. In October, the Delhi High Court acquitted two Kashmiri defendants, S.A.R. Geelani and Afsan Guru, of complicity in the December 2001 terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament. At the same time, the court upheld the death sentence for two additional defendants charged in connection with this attack.

Nearly 41 persons were killed in violence related to the February Nagaland elections (see Sections 1.g. and 4).

Religious and ethnically motivated violence caused numerous deaths, and there were reports that Government agents encouraged this behavior (see Sections 2.c. and 5).

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

According to a December AI report, unexplained disappearances continued during the year. According to an AI report released in 2000, there have been between 700 and 800 unsolved disappearances in Kashmir since 1990. In June, the Jammu and Kashmir state government announced that 3,931 persons remained missing in the state since 1990. This figure contrasts with that given by the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons, which puts the number at more than 8,000. In April, the Jammu and Kashmir judiciary established that 500 of these were disappearances in custody.

According to AI, in May, the NHRC asked the Chief Secretary of Jammu and Kashmir for specific information on the systems used by the state government to record and investigate allegations of enforced or involuntary disappearances. In addition, the Commission requested the number of such allegations recorded and the measures taken to prevent their occurrence. It recommended compensation relief for 719 persons who disappeared, and relief was paid for 61.

In the northeastern states, the Government was unable to provide complete statistics for the number of persons held under special security laws, 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 rights organization credibly reported in 2002 that more than 1,000 persons remained in detention awaiting prosecution under the law, and cases opened under TADA continued through the judicial system. Several thousand others are held in short-term (1-day to 6 months' duration) confinement in transit and interrogation centers.

There were no developments in the June 2002 custodial disappearance of Manzoor Ahmad Dar.

Human rights groups maintained that in Jammu and Kashmir and in the northeastern states, several hundred persons were held by the military and paramilitary forces in long term unacknowledged detention in interrogation centers and transit camps that nominally were intended only for short term confinement. Human rights groups feared that many of these unacknowledged prisoners were subjected to torture and extrajudicial killing (see Sections 1.a. and 1.c.).

The Government maintained that screening committees administered by the state governments provided information about detainees to their families. However, other sources indicated that families were able to confirm the detention of their relatives only by bribing prison guards. In November 2002 the state government of Jammu and Kashmir responded to this problem by installing a screening system to review old detention cases and released numerous detainees (see Section 1.d.). For example, after the Joint Screening Committee in Jammu and Kashmir recommended the release of 24 persons, 17 persons were released. In June, 92 persons were released under the state's 1978 Public Safety Act.

No action has been taken against the approximately 100 police officials who were under investigation for abuses committed while suppressing the violent insurgency in Punjab.

There were credible reports that police throughout the country often did not file legally required arrest reports. As a result, there were hundreds of unsolved disappearances in which relatives claimed that an individual was taken into police custody and never heard from again. Police usually denied these claims, countering that there were no records of arrest.

Militants in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states continued to use kidnappings to terrorize the population, seek the release of detained comrades, and extort funds. Sometimes kidnapped persons later were killed (see Sections 1.a. and 1.g.). In February, militants beheaded two civilians they had kidnapped. There were 211 reported kidnappings in the northeastern states during 2002. For example, on February 24, unknown assailants abducted and killed Kishore Reang, the elder brother of a candidate in Kanchanpur. In July, unknown assailants abducted Rafiqul Islam in Tahirpur. He was subsequently freed from a hotel in Dimapur in September after his father refused to pay a ransom.

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture has reported that the security forces systematically tortured persons in Jammu and Kashmir to coerce confessions to militant activity, to reveal information about suspected militants, or to inflict punishment for suspected support or sympathy with militants.

In a 1996 report, 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 died in custody, and others were afraid to speak out, there were few firsthand accounts, although marks of torture often were found on the bodies of deceased detainees. For example, in February, there were protests in the villages of Handwara and Tral, after a Rashtriya Rifles unit detained two villagers, allegedly tortured them for 2 days and then released them. There were no reports of action taken in any of these cases. Unlike in 2001, the Home Ministry again did not extend an invitation to the U.N. Special Rapporteurs on Torture and on Extrajudicial Killings.

The prevalence of torture by police in detention facilities throughout the country was reflected in the number of cases of deaths in police custody (see Section 1.a.). New Delhi's Tihar jail was notorious for the mistreatment of prisoners, with approximately 10 percent of custodial deaths nationwide occurring there. Police and jailers typically assaulted new prisoners for money and personal articles. In addition, police commonly tortured detainees during custodial interrogation. Although police officers were subject to prosecution for such offenses under the Penal Code, the Government often failed to hold them accountable. According to AI, torture usually takes place under two scenarios: In the course of regular criminal investigations, and following unlawful and arbitrary arrests. For example, during criminal investigations, police frequently resorted to torture to extract information from suspects while in custody.

There was no action taken, nor was any action likely to be taken, against the police officers responsible for the 2002 torture of a 37-year-old man from Chennai.

The family of the 14-year-old girl allegedly abducted, tortured, and raped for 6 days by Patiala police in Punjab in 2001 filed a report with the state authorities to press for prosecution of the responsible police officer. No action was taken by the state government at year’s end.

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 was part of the broader pattern of custodial abuse. NGOs asserted that rape by police, including custodial rape, was more common than NHRC figures indicated. A higher incidence of abuse appeared credible, given other evidence of abusive behavior by police and the likelihood that many rapes were unreported due to a sense of shame and a fear of retribution among victims. However, legal limits placed on the arrest, search, and police custody of women appeared effectively to limit the frequency of rape in custody. In January 2002, a tribal woman alleged that she was raped by the head constable in Vaniyyambadi Police Station in Tamil Nadu after being arrested on theft charges. The case was pending in the Chennai High Court at year's end.

During the year, the state government arrested three BSF members and ordered an inquiry into the 2002 case of the 17-year-old girl allegedly raped by three BSF force personnel in Pahalgam. The three accused were arrested, and the BSF commenced a Staff Court of Inquiry. The inquiry continued at year's end.

There was 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.). It was not included in NHRC statistics because it involved the military forces, over which the NHRC does not have direct investigative authority.

Human rights training for new recruits, middle ranks, and long-serving officers continued at the National Police Academy. The training has raised police awareness of human rights, and there was some decrease in police use of physical force. According to the NHRC, complaints of police harassment and abuse generally declined over a 3 year period. In April, the Home Ministry reported that from 2002 until April, there were 28,765 complaints lodged against police, compared with 29,964 in 2001-2002, and 32,123 in 2000-2001. Some militant groups in the northeast used rape as a tactic to terrorize the populace; however, no cases were known to be reported during the year.

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.).

In Jammu and Kashmir, torture victims or their relatives reportedly 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 of 1990 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 allowed the security forces to act with virtual impunity.

In Punjab, cases of torture were inadequately prosecuted, and victims frequently refused to accept compensation out of fear of retribution. Allegations by human rights activists that victims were hounded and harassed by government agents were common.

The Government occasionally used excessive force in putting down demonstrations (see Section 2.b.). There was no known action during the year, nor was any action likely to be taken, against the police officers responsible for the July 2002 beating of villagers who were forcibly evicted from their homes in Madhya Pradesh.

The Government also occasionally used excessive force against tribal people. There reportedly were no developments in the investigation of the October 2002 shooting of three tribal persons in Orissa.

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

Religiously motivated violence led to a number of deaths and injuries as well as damage to property (see Section 2.c.).

Prison conditions were harsh and life threatening. Prisons were severely overcrowded, and the provision of food and medical care frequently was inadequate. In July, hundreds of prisoners at the Gopalgary District Jail in Bihar went on hunger strike to protest the poor sanitation, meager food supply, and severe overcrowding.

Severe overcrowding in prisons was common. For example, the Divisional Jail in Bihar had a planned capacity of 55 prisoners but held 753 inmates. Prisons operated above capacity because more than 60 percent of the prison population were persons awaiting hearings (see Section 1.d.). For example, the Government reported that New Delhi's Tihar jail held four times as many prisoners as its capacity at year's end. The Government announced plans to address the overcrowding in prisons by building four additional prisons; however, no further action had been taken by year's end.

The 1,157 deaths in judicial custody reported to the NHRC in March included a large proportion of deaths from natural causes that in some cases were aggravated by poor prison conditions (see Section 1.a.). A study in 2002 conducted by the NHRC found that tuberculosis was the cause of death in most deaths in judicial custody. With the country's high incident of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, prison overcrowding was a serious health threat. There were reports that some prisoners died in custody from HIV-AIDS related illnesses.

Women were housed separately from men. By law, juveniles must be detained in rehabilitative facilities; however, at times they were detained in prison, especially in rural areas. Pretrial detainees were not separated from convicted prisoners.

Human rights NGOs, family members, and lawyers were allowed access to some detention facilities; however, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) visited detention facilities in Jammu and Kashmir (see Section 4). Fifteen states and union territories have authorized the NHRC to conduct surprise check-ups on jails. The NHRC's "Special Rapporteur and Chief Coordinator of Custodial Justice" helped implement its directive to state prison authorities to perform medical check-ups on all inmates.

NGOs and human rights activists alleged that the police often committed human rights violations with impunity and that corruption was pervasive. The NHRC reported that the majority of complaints received were against the police. The Malimuth Committee on Judicial Reform issued a report during the year that proposed some police reform, which has yet to be implemented.

The Constitution provides that detainees have the right to be informed of the grounds for their arrest, to be represented by legal counsel, and, unless held under a preventive detention law, to be arraigned within 24 hours of arrest, at which time the accused must either be remanded for further investigation or released. However, thousands of criminal suspects remained in detention without charge. Detention conditions remained poor.

The Constitution provides that arrested persons have the right to be released on bail. 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. In most cases, bail was set between $11.00 ($500 Rs) and $4,000 ($200,000 Rs).

Authorities in Jammu and Kashmir continued to keep in detention persons who had been arrested under TADA in the past, despite the fact that the Act lapsed in 1995. In February, the Jammu and Kashmir state Supreme Court overturned the controversial ruling of a TADA court that had acquitted three militants in the murder of Kashmiri Pandit human rights activist H.N. Wanchoo in 1992. Human rights activists estimated that 351 persons remained in custody under the TADA at year's end. In 2002, the Jammu and Kashmir governments established a committee to review detainees' cases and by year's end, the committee released approximately 17 persons. TADA courts used abridged procedures. For example, defense counsel was not permitted to see witnesses for the prosecution, who were kept behind screens while testifying in court. Also, confessions extracted under duress were admissible as evidence.

However, authorities continue certain cases of persons arrested under TADA before the law lapsed in 1995. For example, in February, government agents detained Simranjit Singh Mann under TADA in New Delhi on making "an inflammatory speech in April 1991 appealing for a separate state of Khalistan." No further information was available. In September, a special court in New Delhi acquitted Kashmiri separatist Yasim Malik of charges filed in 1992 under the TADA for allegedly "aiding and abetting terrorist activities in the [Kashmir] Valley."

The Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), enacted in March 2002, replaced the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) in 2001. POTA allows for the detention without charge for 3 months, and 3 more months if allowed by a special judge, deems not disclosing information to the authorities about terrorist activities an offense, and provides extensive new powers to ban organizations and seize their assets. The act is similar to TADA in its provisions for detentions, summary trials, and the use of testimony obtained under duress. In addition, POTA provides for special courts to try offenses, places the burden of proof at the bail stage on the accused, allows confessions made to a police officer admissible as evidence, extends the period of remand from 15 to 60 days, and sets mandatory sentences for terrorism-related offenses. Human Rights Front, a local Jammu and Kashmir NGO, reported that over 106 cases were registered under POTA by the end of March, 3 of whom were women and an undisclosed number of children. In July, the Government disclosed that 702 persons had been arrested under POTA since its enactment. Human rights groups alleged that the governments have invoked POTA selectively and on dubious grounds against the political opponents of the ruling parties and persons belonging to the minority communities. For example, in January, police arrested Imran Rehman Khan under POTA for a bus attack in December 2002. Authorities claimed that he was linked to LeT terrorist group. In March and June 2002, Yasin Malik was arrested under POTA and the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safely Act (PSA). He was released in November 2002; however, he still faced charges under POTA at year's end.

In December, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the POTA and held that journalists and lawyers have no right to withhold information regarding a crime under the pretext of professional ethics. The court also ruled that under POTA mere "moral support" for a terrorist organization did not constitute an offence under the Act. Despite this ruling, POTA was used to arrest members of various organizations and opposition political parties on charges of publicly expressing support for the banned LTTE terrorist group. For example, in March the Tamil Nadu government reported that 42 persons were detained under the POTA, four of whom were arrested for expressing support for the LTTE.

In October, the Delhi High Court upheld the death sentence for two of the militants who attacked the Indian Parliament in December 2001. The court also acquitted two of the defendants for their role in the attack (see Section 1.d.).

In March, the Government issued a directive to form a POTA review committee to examine the use of the law in various states and prepare a report of findings and recommendations. In October, the government gave statutory powers to the POTA Review Committee for redress of complaints by individuals. The POTA Review Committee reviewed cases, and its findings were binding on the government and interrogating police officers. The Committee had not issued a final report by year's end.

The National Security Act (NSA) permits police to detain persons considered to be security risks anywhere in the country (except for Jammu and Kashmir). The authorities may detain a suspect without charge or trial for as long as 1 year on loosely defined security reasons. NSA does not define "security risk." 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 detained nationwide under the NSA, but in 1997 there were 1,163 such persons. According to press accounts during the year, there were no persons detained under NSA in the northeast, but in New Delhi an alleged narcotics trafficker was arrested under the NSA. The man allegedly lured young children into the narcotics business and then used them as couriers. Human rights groups alleged that preventive detention may be ordered and extended under the act purely on the suggestion of the detaining authority and after an advisory board review. No court may overturn such a decision.

The PSA, a law that applies only in Jammu and Kashmir, permits the detention of persons without charge and without judicial review for up to 2 years. In addition, detainees do not have access to family members or legal counsel. The Government estimated that approximately 514 persons remained in custody under PSA or related charges at year's end, and 412 were in police custody under other charges. In June, 92 prisoners detained under the PSA were released. In February, the Government released Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who had been detained under the PSA and the Officials Secrets Act (see Section 2.a.) since June 2002. Geelani's two sons-in-law, also arrested in June 2002, were released during the year.

The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) of 1958 remained in effect in Nagaland, Manipur, Assam and parts of Tripura, and a version of this law was in effect in Jammu and Kashmir. Under this Act, the Government has the power to declare any State or Union Territory a "disturbed area;" allows security forces to fire on any person if it is considered "necessary for maintenance of law and order;" the authorities can arrest any person "against whom reasonable suspicion exists" with no obligation to inform the detainee of the grounds for arrest; and the authorities are given immunity from prosecution for any acts committed by them in relation to the Act.

A program of prison visits by the ICRC was designed in part to help assure communications between detainees and their families. According to the Home Ministry's annual report, the ICRC visited 53 detention centers and over 7 thousand detainees during the year, including all acknowledged detention centers in Jammu and Kashmir, and Kashmiris held elsewhere in the country. However, the ICRC was not authorized to visit interrogation centers or transit centers, nor did it have access to regular detention centers in the northeastern states (see Sections 1.c. and 4). During the year, the ICRC stated that it continued to encounter difficulties in maintaining systematic access to people detained in Jammu and Kashmir.

The court system was extremely overloaded, resulting in the detention of thousands of persons awaiting trial for periods longer than they would receive if convicted. Prisoners were held for months or even years before obtaining a trial date. As of July 2002, there reportedly was a backlog of over 13 million cases in the lower courts, while high courts had a backlog of 3.5 million cases. The Supreme Court had 23,000 pending cases. The NHRC reported that 75 percent of the country's total inmates were unconvicted prisoners awaiting completion of trial.

Several detainees complained to government officials that they were detained without charge, some for many months, while police investigated their connection with Naxalites. In August, the NHRC reported that it had issued notice to the Orissa and Andhra Pradesh Government to order an investigation into the large numbers of innocent people arrested by local police on suspicion of being Naxalites.

In 2000, the Government announced that it would fund the creation of 1,734 additional courts during 2000-2005. At year's end, 1,205 of these courts had been set up.

There were no political detainees reported during the year.

Exile was prohibited and there were no reports of forced exile during the year.

The judicial system was extremely overburdened. In general, the judiciary enforced the right to a fair trail; however, there was a large backlog of cases, and as a result, some courts barely functioned. The Criminal Procedure Code provides that trials be conducted publicly 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 publicly. Defendants have the right to choose counsel independent of the Government. There were effective channels for appeal at most levels of the judicial system, and the State provides free legal counsel to indigent defendants.

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, including those that discriminate against women.

In Jammu and Kashmir, the judicial system barely functioned 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. Jammu and Kashmir were reluctant to hear cases involving terrorist crimes and failed to act expeditiously on habeas corpus cases, if they acted at all. There were a few convictions of alleged terrorists in the Jammu High Court during the year; many more accused militants had been in pretrial detention for years. The number of militants in pretrial detention is in the hundreds; however, the exact number is unknown. During the year, the Government announced plans to release 274 such detainees, as a result of court orders. By year's end, only 24 militants had been released under instructions of the government-appointed Review Committee.

Criminal gangs in all four southern states were known to attack rivals and deny free access to justice. In some cases, accused persons were attacked while being escorted by police to the courts.

To remedy the severe overcrowding in the judicial system, the Government asked the government-appointed Malimath Committee to identify possible improvement. In April, AI reported that the recommendations of the Malimath Committee "represent an extremely narrow interpretation of the problems which ail the system and a set of solutions which ignore fundamental human rights safeguards." Further, AI believes "the reports recommendations will increase the risk of torture for those in police detention, severely weakening safeguards for fair trial and reduce legal protections for women."

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Independence of the Judiciary was not invited to visit the country during the year.

There were no reports of political prisoners.

The Government Enforcement Directorate (ED), which was mandated to investigate foreign exchange and currency violations, searched, interrogated, and arrested thousands of business and management professionals annually, often without search warrants. However, the ED's efforts ultimately resulted in very few convictions.

The 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 tranquility." Every state government has used these powers, as has the central Government.

The Information Technology Act grants 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 were 1 year and 5 years respectively. The Act also requires Internet cafes to monitor Internet use and inform the authorities (see Section 2.a.). At year's end, the government had not circulated rules for implementation of this law.

The Government did not restrict citizens' personal appearance; however, in Jammu and Kashmir and Manipur, militants attempted to enforce female dress codes. The Kanglei Yawon Kanna Lup, a militant group in Manipur, announced a dress code for the state's women that bans the wearing of saris, salwar kameez, and trousers. The group threatened to punish with death women who violated 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 the Rajouri region of Kashmir, the militant groups Jamiat-ul-Mujahideen and Shariati Nefazi Islami ordered Muslim women to wear burqas, and three women were killed for not obeying these orders (see Sections 2.c. and 5).

The Home Ministry was unable to estimate how many civilians were killed in crossfire by security forces in Jammu and Kashmir during the year. In June, an Imam and his 13-year-old son were shot and killed in Baramulla by security forces in a case of mistaken identity. A magisterial inquiry was not completed by year's end. The security forces continued to abduct and kill suspected terrorists, but were not adequately held accountable for their actions. Many army officers' inclination not to participate in such practices led to a reduced number of cases, and, as a result, government-supported countermilitants often committed these abuses.

According to credible reports, in addition to harassment during searches and arbitrary arrests (see Section 1.d.), security forces abducted and sometimes used civilians as human shields in night patrolling and while searching for landmines; such abuses occurred mostly in the Kupwara and Doda districts.

The Home Ministry reported 2,841 cases of artillery shelling and mortar and small arms fire across the LOC killed an unknown number of civilians during the year. According to the Home Ministry, security forces killed 1,526 militants during the year. There were reports that government forces displaced civilians and destroyed homes during offensive operations.

Anti-government Kashmiri militant groups also committed serious abuses, including numerous execution-style mass killings of Hindu (Pandit), Sikh, and Buddhist villagers in Jammu and Kashmir (see Sections 1.a. and 5). The worst case occurred in March, when militants dressed in military fatigues killed 24 Pandits in Nadimarg. Militant groups also killed police officers and members of the security forces. For example, in July, militants killed seven pilgrims near Katra.

In addition to political killings, kidnappings, 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 were Afghani, Pakistani, and other nationals. The militants used time-delayed explosives, landmines, hand grenades, and snipers. There was 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. For example, in March, militants killed three women and mutilated six other persons in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. During the year, militants killed persons who allegedly were informants for the Government.

Extremist and terrorist activities in the northeast also claimed many lives. In addition to ambushes, terrorists increasingly resorted to destroying bridges and laying time bombs on roads, on railway tracks, and in trains. In March, two persons were killed and six injured when the ULFA attacked four locations in Assam.

During the year, police arrested numerous persons suspected of involvement in previous terrorist attacks and charged some persons with planning human suicide bomb attacks to advance Sikh separatism. Police also captured dozens of separatist insurgents in Jammu and Kashmir for bombings, killings, and acts of sabotage.

Improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and landmines were a problem in Jammu and Kashmir. Reportedly, militants continued to use IED and landmines for offensive and defensive purposes. Militants previously restricted landmine use to army convoys traveling outside of major cities, but during the year they used command-detonated devices in and around Srinagar. In August, the Home Ministry reported to Parliament that since December 2001, 124 persons have been killed by landmines in the Sriganganagar district.

Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:

Under the Official Secrets Act, the Government may restrict publication of sensitive stories or suppress criticism of its policies. On January 10, the Government found that the 2002 detention under the Act of Syed Iftikhar Gilani was unjustified and released him.

In January, the Government passed a Freedom of Information law. This law allows citizens to request and receive documents from the Government that are considered to be in the public domain.

Most print media were privately owned. In the electronic media, 80 percent of the television channels were privately owned, and 20 percent were operated by Doordarshan, a semi-autonomous body controlled by the Government. Government-controlled radio was the main source of news for much of the population.

The Newspapers Incitements to Offenses Act remained in effect in Jammu and Kashmir. Under the Act, a district magistrate may prohibit the press from publishing material likely to incite murder or any act of violence, and authorizes the authorities to seize newspaper premises and printing presses. Despite these restrictions, newspapers in Srinagar, the capital of Jammu and Kashmir, reported in detail on alleged human rights abuses by the Government and regularly published press releases of Islamic separatist Kashmiri groups. The authorities generally allowed foreign journalists to travel freely in Jammu and Kashmir, where they regularly spoke with separatist leaders and filed reports on government abuses.

In Assam, the state government reportedly attempted to impede criticism by filing a number of criminal defamation charges against journalists.

In July, the Tamil Nadu government brought a defamation suit against the English daily The Hindu for printing a series of articles about the mishandling by police of a kidnapping. The case was not heard during the year.

In November, the Tamil Nadu Assembly speaker ordered the arrest of several officers and journalists at The Hindu. In response, the newspaper obtained an injunction from the Supreme Court against the Speaker's arrest directive.

In December, Randeep Sudan, a senior official in the office of the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, filed defamation charges in his personal capacity against the daily newspaper Andhra Jyody. The newspaper had reported that Sudan was corrupt but also published his response to the allegations.

The Press Council 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 criticized newspapers or journalists it believed had broken the code of conduct, but its findings, while noted by the press community, carried no legal weight.

At the national and state levels, governments and political parties often seek to influence regional media. The Hindu was unable to get advertising from the state government of Tamil Nadu after its negative reporting of the actions taken by the state. In addition, in Gujarat, a number of journalists at English language newspapers and electronic media, who had criticized Chief Minister Narendra Modi's government and its political supporters following the 2002 riots, continued to be subjected to "strong-arm" tactics. The threat of losing state government revenue contributed to self-censorship by smaller media outlets, which heavily relied on government advertising.

Authorities occasionally beat, detained, and harassed journalists, which resulted in some self-censorship. For example, on August 2, Bapi Roy, a photojournalist for the Agartala daily were beaten by members of the police. At year's end, the police had investigated the incident but no charges had been filed. In September, government employees beat several journalists in Assam, three of whom required hospitalization. At year's end, a departmental inquiry was conducted, and the Government suspended several state employees.

In some instances, allegations of violence against journalists were made against state governments. On May 17, the offices of two Bengali daily newspapers, Dainik Vivek and Dainik Janapad, were attacked by armed men believed to owe allegiance to the state's Information Minister. At year’s end, two persons were arrested for the incidents.

In August, two journalists were assaulted by the Students Federation of India, which was affiliated with CPI(M) in West Bengal. Press reports suggested the journalists were assaulted to deter them from reporting inappropriate actions by members of the SFI.

During the year, the 2001 case of police assaulting 12 members of the press during a DMK rally was decided. The Chennai High Court directed the Tamil Nadu government to pay compensation to the 12 journalists; however, pending a determination of damages, at year's end no compensation had been paid.

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 and the government claimed the banned books caused communal tensions. In December, West Bengal banned Taslima Nasreem's "Split in Two" because the book allegedly slandered Islam and the Prophet Mohammed.

Intimidation by militant groups caused significant self-censorship by journalists. The local press continued to face pressure from militant groups attempting to influence coverage. For example, on January 31, unknown assailants killed Parvaz Mohammed Sultan, editor of an independent wire service in Srinagar. The motive for his killing remained unknown. On April 28, unknown assailants killed 5 persons after detonating a car bomb and throwing grenades into the offices of Doordarshan Television and Radio in Srinagar. The clash resulted in the deaths of three assailants and two security officers. On May 29, unknown assailants shot Zafar Iqbal, a reporter for the Kashmir Images in Srinagar. Local journalists believed Igbal may have been targeted because the publication is known for supporting the Government. The police had not arrested anyone in connection with the killing by year's end.

Private satellite television was distributed widely by cable or satellite dish. These channels provided substantial competition for Doordarshan, the government-owned television network, in both presentation and credibility. Doordarshan frequently was accused of manipulating the news in the Government's favor; however, in some parts of the country satellite channel owners used their medium to promote the platforms of the political parties that they supported. In addition, citizens had access to uncensored Cable News Network, the British Broadcasting Company and a variety of other foreign programs.

Government measures to control objectionable content on satellite channel -- notably, tobacco and alcohol advertisements -- still were in effect, which held cable distributors liable under civil law. The (often foreign) satellite broadcasters, rather than the domestic cable operators, fall within the scope of the regulation.

AM radio broadcasting remained a government monopoly. Private FM radio station ownership was legalized during 2000, but licenses only authorized entertainment and educational content. Although there were privately owned radio stations, they were not permitted to broadcast news.

A government censorship board reviewed films before licensing them for distribution. The board censored material it deemed offensive to public morals or communal sentiment. For example, in March, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) denied a certificate to the documentary "Aakrosh." The film's producers said that the authorities denied a certificate, and thereby prevented the film from being shown publicly, in retaliation for its expose on the riots in Gujarat. This banning encouraged self-censorship among film-makers.

In August, 11 security officials in Lucknow reportedly assaulted a senior television correspondent during a Presidential visit. He was hospitalized after sustaining several injuries during the attack. In December, 50 political activists vandalized the offices of a television station in Mumbai which aired criticism of the state's Deputy Chief Minister, who later resigned and accepted "moral responsibility."

The Government limited access to the Internet. The Informational Technology Act 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. On July 27, Anirudh Bahal and Mathew Samuel, both reporters with the on-line newspaper Tehelka.com were arrested and charged with conspiracy in connection with a story published on the Web site in October 2000. Tarun Tejpal, founder and editor-in-chief of the Web site, says that Tehelka.com is "a victim of competing political interest in a largely corrupt Indian establishment."

The Government restricted academic freedom. Some government officials continued to advocate "saffronizing," or raising the profile of Hindu cultural norms and views in public education, which has prompted criticism from minority leaders, opposition politicians, academics, and advocates of secular values. On January 31, the Ministry of Human Resources Development (HRD), headed by Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, passed strict academic guidelines to regulate academic partnerships between Indian and western universities and academics, in line with Hindutva philosophy. The new guidelines issued to all central universities require HRD permission for "all forms of foreign collaborations and other international academic exchange activities," including seminars, conferences, workshops, guest lectures, research, etc.

Unlike in previous years, there were no reports of banning of religious processions in Gujarat. Unlike in previous years, the Jammu and Kashmir government allowed a procession of separatist groups to march on the anniversary of the Birth of the Prophet.

In May, Jharkhand police fired upon a demonstration, and 12 persons were injured. The persons were protesting the admission of "outsiders" to take examinations for teaching positions. In June, police fired upon a demonstration in Shopian, Jammu and Kashmir, and four students were injured. The students were protesting an alleged molestation of some women students by security forces; however, the Government alleged that police fired only in self-defense.

No action was taken against security forces who forcibly dispersed demonstrations or meetings during the year or in 2002 or 2001.

NGOs must secure the prior approval of the Ministry of Home Affairs before organizing international conferences. Human rights groups contended that this provides the Government with substantial political control over the work of NGOs and their freedom of assembly and association. Some NGOs alleged that some of their members were denied visas to enter the country.

Although the law provides for religious freedom, enforcement of the law was poor, particularly at the state and local levels, where the failure to deal adequately with intragroup and intergroup conflict abridged constitutional protections.

The leading party in the government coalition is the BJP, a Hindu nationalist political party with links to Hindu extremist groups that were implicated in violent acts against Christians and Muslims. The BJP also leads state governments in Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Arunachal Pradesh. In Orissa, the BJP rules in coalition with the Biju Janapa Dal. Many BJP leaders and party workers were members of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS), an organization based on Hindu nationalism, and share some of its ideology. The RSS espouses a return to what it considers Hindu values and cultural norms. However, the BJP is an independent political party, and the degree of RSS influence over its policy making was not clear.

There were reports that members of the BJP, the RSS, and other affiliated organizations harassed and at times threatened the use of violence against Christians and Muslims. The BJP and RSS officially expressed respect and tolerance for other religions; however, the RSS in particular opposes conversions from Hinduism and believes that all citizens should adhere to Hindu cultural values. The BJP officially agrees that the caste system should be eliminated, but many of its members are ambivalent about this. The BJP's traditional cultural agenda includes calls for construction of a new Hindu temple in Ayodhya. The temple would replace an ancient Hindu temple believed to have stood on the site of a mosque in Ayodhya that a Hindu mob destroyed in 1992; for the repeal of Article 370 of the Constitution, which grants special rights to the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the country's only Muslim majority state; and for the enactment of a uniform civil code that would apply to members of all religions. In December, 5 persons were killed and 27 injured after Hindu-Muslim clashes broke out in Hyderabad. Tens of thousands of police were deployed in the area to prevent further attacks.

No registration is required for religions. Legally mandated benefits are assigned to certain groups, including some defined by their religion. For example, some states reserve jobs and educational enrollment slots for Muslims, who do not benefit from reservations designed to help lower-caste Hindus.

In May 2001, the Government banned Deendar Anjuman, a Muslim group whose members were arrested for a series of church bombings in Karnataka in 2000. During the year, the Government arrested and charged approximately 40 members of Deendar Anjuman implicated in the Karnataka bombing.

On January 10, the controversial Prohibition of Forcible Conversion of Religion Act that bans "forced" religious conversions was passed in the state of Tamil Nadu. In February, the "Freedom of Religion" Bill that provides penalties for conversion using allurement or force, including up to 3 years in prison and a fine of $1,000 (50,000 Rs), was passed in Gujarat. Conversions in Gujarat must be assessed by officials, and prior permission given by the District Magistrate. Human rights advocates believed that both laws make it more difficult for poor persons, mistreated minorities, and others ostracized under the caste system, to convert from Hinduism to another religion. Further, the Tamil Nadu law requires that persons involved in a conversion report it to the local magistrate within 10 days. Authorities in Tamil Nadu announced their intention to enforce the law as a deterrent to large-scale conversions. The Gujarat bill requires persons converting to have prior permission from the district authorities before conversion.

There is no national law that bars a citizen or foreigner from professing or propagating his or her religious beliefs; however, India's Foreigners Act strictly prohibits visitors who are in the country on tourist visas from engaging in religious preaching without first obtaining permission from the Ministry of Home Affairs. During the year, state officials continued to refuse to issue permits for foreign Christian missionaries, as well as other persons, to enter some northeastern states, on the grounds of political instability in the region. Missionaries and religious organizations must comply with the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), which restricts funding from abroad and, therefore, the ability of certain groups to finance their activities. The Government was empowered to ban a religious organization if it has violated the FCRA, has provoked intercommunity friction, or has been involved in terrorism or sedition.

The legal system accommodated minority religions' personal status laws; there were different personal laws for different religious communities. Religion-specific laws pertain in matters of marriage, divorce, adoption, and inheritance. For example, Muslim personal status law governed many non-criminal matters involving Muslims, including family law, inheritance, and divorce. The personal status laws of the religious communities sometimes discriminated against women (see Section 5).

Tensions between Muslims and Hindus, and between Hindus and Christians, continued during the year. Attacks on religious minorities decreased overall but occurred in several states, which brought into question the Government's ability to prevent sectarian and religious violence or prosecute those responsible for it. For example, on November 20 in Assam, communal violence broke out after Assamese youths prevented groups from neighboring Bihar, a poor, mostly Hindi-speaking state, from participating in recruitment exams at the state-owned railways. The Bihari youths retaliated by attacking trains bound for Assam and allegedly raping a girl. The Government deployed troops to patrol Assam in an attempt to quell outbreaks of violence. On November 21, a mosque was bombed in Parbhani, east of Mumbai. The attack took place during Friday prayers during Ramadan; at least seven persons were wounded. On the same day in Orissa, Hindu militants belonging to the VHP and Bajrang Dal torched a Catholic church. The attack followed several days of violence. On November 20, numerous unknown persons wearing saffron-—the symbol of Hindutva ideology-—burned Bibles in front of the district governor's residence and then broke into a church of a nearby village and raped a nun. There were no reports of any action taken against members of mobs who killed during the year.

Reports continued that Hindus received limited punishment for the 2002 Gujarat violence, while some Muslims complained of continued harassment and discrimination by the state government in Gujarat (see Section 5). In Gujarat, there continued to be credible evidence of prejudice in favor of Hindus and an unwritten policy of impunity against the perpetrators of 2002 religious violence. For example, the 70-page HRW July report noted that more than 1 hundred Muslims had been charged under the country's POTA for their alleged involvement in the 2002 train violence in Godhra. However, no Hindus had been charged under POTA in connection with the violence at year's end. Further, HRW reported "although the Indian government initially boasted of thousands of arrests following the [2002] attacks, most of those arrested have since been acquitted, released on bail with no further action taken, or simply let go. Police regularly downgrade serious charges to lesser crimes – from murder to rape to rioting, for example – and alter victims' statements to delete the names of the accused." Additionally, the report criticized the Gujarat state court, which in June, acquitted 21 persons accused of burning alive 12 Muslims in a bakery in Vadodara after 35 of the 73 witnesses retracted their statements (see Section 5). In September, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the authorities in Gujarat for its handling of the "Best Bakery" case. Various human rights organizations have appealed to the Supreme Court to move certain cases outside the jurisdiction of Gujarat. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear this matter starting in January 2004.

Some Christian groups also claimed that BJP officials at state and local levels became increasingly uncooperative. The Government also has been criticized for not attempting to restrain the country's radical Hindu groups.

Christian leaders noted a decrease in the incidents of violence against their community and also a change in the type of incidents; however, attacks against Christians continued. For example, in January, Hindu militants attacked missionary Joseph Cooper and several others in Kerala. Police arrested nine persons in that attack; however, no persons were charged at year's end. In a report on the attack, the human rights NGO "CHRO" quoted a Minister as saying that the request by local police to have Cooper leave the country "would send the right signal that the country will not be soft on foreigners who violate the laws of the land."

No action was taken against persons who attacked Christians or churches in 2002. Despite a reduction in physical attacks against Christians, Hindu nationalists continued an ideological campaign to limit access to Christian institutions and discourage or, in some cases, prohibit conversions to Christianity. There were no developments in the Sister Brishi Ekka case during the year. In 2002, a cable television station promoting Catholic values was launched in Kerala.

Citizens often referred to schools, hospitals, and other institutions as "missionary" even when they were owned and run entirely by indigenous Christian citizens. By using the adjective "missionary," the RSS tapped into a longstanding fear of foreign religious domination.

The trial of Dara Singh and his 12 associates for the 1999 murder of Australian missionary Graham Staines and his two sons concluded during the year. On September 23, the court sentenced Dara Singh to death and his associates to life imprisonment. In October, Singh appealed his sentence to the Orissa High Court.

In Christian majority areas, Christians sometimes were the oppressors. In Tripura, there were several cases of harassment of non-Christians by Christian members of the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT), a militant tribal group with an evangelical bent. For example, NLFT tribal insurgents have prohibited Hindu and Muslim festivals in areas that they control, cautioned women not to wear traditional Hindu tribal attire, and prohibited indigenous forms of worship. In Assam, the issue of Bangladeshi migrants (who generally were Muslim) has become very sensitive among the Assamese (predominantly Hindu) population, which considers its majority position to be in jeopardy.

Hindus have also been victims of violence. For example, on May 2, Muslim extremists reportedly attacked Hindu fishermen. Nine persons and 16 others were injured. The NHRC demanded a report from the state government on this incident. On August 26, 2 bomb attacks near the Gateway to India monument and the Hindu Temple of Mumbadevi killed 44 persons. The Government responded quickly to dispel further violence. The government arrested four Muslims and charged them in the attack. In their statements to police, the bombers identified their intent to retaliate against Hindus for 2002 anti-Muslim rioting in Gujarat.

Unlike in previous years, the exodus of many from the Sikh community did not occur.

The degree to which the BJP's nationalist Hindu agenda impacted religious minorities varied depending on the region. In some states, governments made efforts to reaffirm their commitment to secularism. In others, mainly in the south, religious groups alleged that since the BJP's rise to power in the national Government, some government bureaucrats began to enforce laws selectively to the detriment of religious minorities. For example, this revivalist campaign included the "Hinduization" of education, including the revision of history books to include hate propaganda against Islamic and Christian communities. The situation in the east varied. For example, the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act contains a provision requiring a monthly government report on the number of conversions and requiring a police inquiry into conversions, but this provision was not enforced.

Vehicle checkpoints, at which Border Security Force (BSF) routinely searched and questioned occupants, were a common feature throughout most of Jammu and Kashmir. It also was common for police to block entry and exit points in preparation for gathering young males for police lineups. These searches tended to focus on troubled areas, as opposed to the mass searches that were common in the past. According to a credible source, such search operations seldom yielded any results. There were frequent curfews in areas of conflict, including in New Delhi, in recent years. The Government also expanded construction of a security barrier along the LoC in disputed Kashmir, causing difficulties for Kashmiris and Pakistanis and isolating residents. The barrier was to be completed by June, 2004. The Government claimed that the barrier was necessary to prevent terrorism.

Under the Passports Act, the Government may deny a passport to any applicant who "may or is likely to engage outside India in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India." The Government used this provision to prohibit the foreign travel of some government critics, especially those advocating Sikh independence and members of the violent separatist movement in Jammu and Kashmir. For example, in January, the Government suspended the passport of Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, a leader of the separatist All-Parties Hurriyat Conference.

During the year, there were reports that Bodo-Santhal ethnic clashes continued. More than 87,000 persons lived under poor conditions in relief camps in Assam as a result of the ongoing violence between Bodos and Santhals. On November 15, Assam separatists prevented candidates from Hindi-speaking state of Bihar from applying for jobs. It was reported that soon after, Bihar youths attacked and injured 50 persons from Assam. As a result, ULFA began attacking the Hindi-speaking persons, killing 40 and displacing 17,000.

According to the Norwegian Refugee Council, at least 650,000 persons in India have been displaced due to conflicts in states of Jammu and Kashmir, Gujarat, and the North-East (see Sections 1.a., 1.c., and 1.g.).

The Government estimated that there were 10 million Bangladeshis living illegally in the country. By year's end, the Illegal Migrants Determination by Tribunal law (IMDT), which largely was aimed at illegal Bangladeshi immigrants, had not been implemented nor repealed.

The law does not provide for the granting of asylum or refugee status to persons who meet the definition of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. The Government has not formulated a policy regarding refugees, asylees, or first asylum. The office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had no formal status, but the Government permitted the UNHCR to assist certain groups of refugees (notably Afghans, Iranians, Somalis, Burmese, and Sudanese). Unlike in previous years, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees did not visit the country.

The Government also provides temporary protection to certain individuals who do not qualify as asylees or refugees.

The Government provided certain assistance in refugee camps or in resettlement areas, most notable to Tibetan and Sri Lankan Tamil refugees; however, this was applied inconsistently. During the year, the UNHCR began to end the monthly subsistence allowance of Burmese refugees. As a result, Burmese refugees and asylum seekers demonstrated outside the UNHCR office in New Delhi during the year. On November 12, the authorities used water cannons, electric batons, and canes to forcibly disperse 500 demonstrators and 25 of the demonstrators were injured.

According to UNHCR and government statistics, there were approximately 110,000 Tibetans in 130 camps, approximately 64,000 Sri Lankan Tamils in 104 camps, and several thousand Sri Lankan Tamils living in the country at year's end. The refugees in the camps were permitted to work, and the state and central governments paid to educate refugee children and provided limited welfare benefits. Some 80,000 Chakma permanent residents remained in Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram. By year's end, the Supreme Court's order to extend citizenship to this group was not enforced. The UNHCR reported that 11,642 Afghans, 857 Burmese, and approximately 350 others were receiving assistance from the UNHCR in the country as of August 2001. The Government also assisted an unknown number of persons from Tibet and Sri Lanka. Although the Government formally did not recognize these persons as refugees, it did not deport them. Instead, they received renewable residence permits, or their status was ignored. Increasingly during the year, some of these groups--Afghans, Iraqis, and Iranians in particular--were not granted renewal of their residence permits by the authorities on the grounds that they were not in possession of valid national passports. Due to financial and other reasons, many refugees were unable or unwilling to obtain or renew their national passports and therefore were unable to regularize their status in the country.

The central Government generally denied NGOs and the UNHCR direct access to the camps. NGOs reported refugee complaints about deteriorated housing, poor sanitation, delayed assistance payments, and inadequate medical care in the Tamil refugee camps. Human rights groups alleged that the Government used some of these "special camps" to hold suspected members of the LTTE terrorist organization. Human rights groups alleged that inmates of the special camps sometimes were subjected to physical abuse and that their confinement to the camps amounted to imprisonment without trial. They alleged that several of those acquitted by the Supreme Court in 1999 of involvement in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi remained confined in these special camps. During the year, the Tamil Nadu government initiated a review of the inmates of the special camps to determine whether any could be released. At year's end, approximately 35 persons remained in the special camps.

Santhals were non-recognized refugees in Assam, and human rights groups estimated that 200,000 lived in relief camps. The Santhals were being sheltered in 100 camps in Assam; conditions in such camps were extremely poor, and the Assam government claimed it did not have the resources to improve the conditions of the relief camps.

Ethnic Chins were among the non-recognized refugees in the northeastern states, particularly Mizoram. During the year, tensions between security forces and Chin National Force (CNF) insurgents operating in Burma allegedly resulted in the detention, interrogation, and expulsion of some persons associated with the CNF to Burma, where they credibly feared persecution. In 2001, there were news reports that thousands of ethnic Chins were asked to leave Mizoram. The Mizoram Chief Minister stated that he wanted the border with Burma to be "fenced to check further infiltration of immigrants into the state." Human rights monitors alleged that approximately 1,000 Chin refugees were arrested in Mizoram, and some 200 had been repatriated forcibly to Burma between July and September 2000. NGOs estimated that 10,000 persons were expelled to Burma, where "the deportees were jailed pending hearings to be scheduled before military tribunals." An estimated 40,000 to 50,000 Chins lived and worked illegally in Mizoram.

Mizoram human rights groups estimated that some 31,000 Reangs, a tribal group from Mizoram that were displaced due to a sectarian conflict, were being sheltered in 6 camps in North Tripura. Conditions in such camps were poor, and the Tripura government asked the central Government to allot funds for their care. Reang leaders in the camps pressed for reserved jobs, education benefits, and a comprehensive rehabilitation package for refugees in the relief camps. The Mizoram government rejected these demands and maintained that only 16,000 of the refugees had a valid claim to reside in the state.

Section 3 Respect for Political Rights: The Right of Citizens to Change Their Government

The Constitution provides citizens with the right to change their government peacefully, and citizens exercised this right in practice through periodic, free, and fair elections held on the basis of universal suffrage. The country has a democratic, parliamentary system of government with representatives elected in multiparty elections. A Parliament sits for 5 years unless dissolved earlier for new elections, except under constitutionally defined emergency situations. State governments were elected at regular intervals except in states under President's Rule.

On the advice of the Prime Minister, the President may proclaim a state of emergency in any part of the national territory in the event of war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. Similarly, President's Rule may be declared in the event of a collapse of a state's constitutional machinery. The Supreme Court has upheld the Government's authority to suspend fundamental rights during an emergency.

During the year, State Assembly elections were conducted in February in Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Tripura and in December in Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Mizoram, Delhi, and Rajasthan. Observers reported that the elections took place in a generally free and transparent manner; however, there were incidents of violence and reports that a mob destroyed a electronic voting machine in Nagaland. Five persons were killed and 24 injured in poll-related violence and communal clashes in Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh. The Election Commission reported a voter turnout of more than 60 percent.

There were 73 women in the 783 seat legislature. There were 7 women in the Cabinet of Ministers. A large proportion of women participated in voting throughout the country (with turnout rates slightly lower than those of men), and numerous women were represented in all major parties in the national and state legislatures. The passage of the "Panchayati Raj" constitutional amendments reserved 30 percent of seats in elected village councils (Panchayats) for women, which brought more than 1 million women into political life at the grassroots level.

The Constitution reserves seats in Parliament and state legislatures for "scheduled tribes" and "scheduled castes" in proportion to their population (see Section 5). Indigenous people actively participated in national and local politics, but their impact depended on their numerical strength. In the northeastern states, indigenous people were a large proportion of the population and consequently exercised a dominant influence in the political process. In contrast, in Maharashtra and Gujarat, tribal people were a small minority and were unsuccessful in blocking projects that they opposed.

Section 4 Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights

A wide variety of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction, investigating abuses and publishing their findings on human rights cases; however, in some states and in a few circumstances, human rights groups faced restrictions. Human rights monitors in Jammu and Kashmir were unable to move around the state freely to document human rights violations due to fear of retribution by security forces and countermilitants. Several individuals closely involved in the documentation of violations in Jammu and Kashmir, including lawyers and journalists, have been attacked in past years and in some cases killed. International human rights monitors had difficulty in obtaining visas to visit the country for investigation purposes. For example, in June the Government denied a visa to the Secretary General of AI after AI released a critical report on state actions in Gujarat.

The main domestic human rights organization operating in the country is the Government-appointed National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). The NHRC has powers to investigate and recommend policy changes, punishment, and compensation in cases of police abuse. In addition, the NHRC was directed to contribute to the establishment, growth, and functioning of human rights NGOs. The Commission acted independently of the Government, often voicing strong criticism of government institutions and actions. However, the NHRC faced numerous institutional and legal weaknesses, which human rights groups said hampered its effectiveness. From 2002 until year's end, the NHRC recorded 68,776 complaints, more than 50 percent of which were from the state of Uttar Pradesh. Approximately 54,013 of these 68,776 were dismissed or disposed.

The NHRC also has influenced the legislative process, particularly by issuing recommendations on women's issues, persons with disabilities, and children's rights. The NHRC encouraged the establishment of human rights cells in police headquarters in some states; however, this policy was not implemented in any meaningful way. The NHRC also was involved in programs to eliminate child labor (see Section 6.c.).

The NHRC asked the Supreme Court to take corrective action in regard to the "Best Bakery" case in Gujarat, in which the Gujarat lower court acquitted 21 defendants in May. In September, the Supreme Court issued a directive to the Government of Gujarat to appeal the acquittal. In December, the Gujarat High Court confirmed a lower court's decision. (see Section 2.c.).

There were no developments in the investigation of the 2002 killing of human rights defender Navleen Kumar outside of Mumbai; or the stabbing of P.B. D'Sa.

Several Christian-affiliated international relief agencies stated that during the year their work in delivering services to the poor became considerably more difficult due to threats, increased bureaucratic obstacles, and, in some cases, physical attacks on their field workers by Hindu extremists (see Sections 2.c.).

International human rights organizations were restricted. For example, during the year the government refused HRW access to the country. The Government also denied the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings permission to visit the country.

The 1993 Protection of Human Rights Act recommends that each state to establish a state human rights commission, but not all states have done so. Commissions exist in 14 of the 25 states: Assam, Chhattisgarh, Manipur, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and Rajasthan. Gujarat has not officially established a state commission, but in 2002 appointed a two-member judicial commission to investigate the violence in Gujarat. The commission had not reported its conclusions by year's end. The state human rights commission established in Jammu and Kashmir by an act of the state legislature had no power to independently investigate alleged human rights violations committed by security force members.

For example, Punjab's Human Rights Commission (PHRC) in 2002-3 received 995 complaints of human rights violations. According to AI, the Commission was understaffed and seriously limited by the PHRA, which limited its powers to investigate individual cases of human rights violations. The People's Commission, a separate body to investigate disappearances, was established by retired Supreme Court Justice Kuldip Singh to highlight the fate of more than 2,000 persons who "disappeared" during the period of political unrest in Punjab (see Section 1.b.); it continued to receive little cooperation from state government authorities. During the year, HRW commended the Committee for Coordination of Disappearances in Punjab (CCDP), a Punjab-based human rights organization, for its report documenting 672 of the "disappearance" cases currently pending before the NHRC (see Section 1.b.). Six years ago, the Indian Supreme Court directed the NHRC to investigate 2,097 cases of illegal cremation in Punjab's Amritsar district. NHRC has yet to hear testimony for any case.

In addition to these state human rights commissions, special courts to hear human rights cases were established in Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh. However, the courts in Uttar Pradesh did not function, despite a 1999 court order that they be reactivated.

Section 5 Discrimination Based on Race, Sex, Disability, Language, or Social status

The Constitution prohibits discrimination