India

• INDIA: ‘The hijab ban is just another tool used by right-wing politicians to remain in power’

  CIVICUS speaks about the recent ban on the hijab, a headscarf worn by Muslim women, in educational institutions in the Indian state of Karnataka with Syeda Hameed, co-founder and board member of the Muslim Women’s Forum (MWF).

  Founded in 2000, MWF is a civil society organisation (CSO) working for the empowerment, inclusion and education of Muslim women in India. Its primary goal is to provide Muslim women with a platform for expressing their aspirations and opinions on matters directly affecting their lives.

  

  How did the hijab row start?

  The controversy started in the town of Udupi, a small secular district of Karnataka state in southwest India, where girls wearing the hijab were not allowed to enter a college campus because the administration deemed it a violation of uniform rules. Some students protested against the ban, and protests escalated into violence.

  From this tiny part of Karnataka, the hijab row spread to other parts of the country. In response to Muslim women wearing the hijab on campuses, many Hindu students took to wearing saffron shawls, a colour seen as a Hindu symbol.

  The matter reached a Karnataka high court as some Muslim students filed petitions claiming that they have the right to wear the hijab under the guarantees provided by the Indian Constitution. But the high court’s verdict kept the ban, arguing that the hijab is not an essential part of Islam. Surprisingly, the bench in Karnataka includes one Muslim woman judge.

  What triggered the decision by Karnataka’s educational institutions?

  The decision to ban Muslim students from wearing the hijab in colleges’ premises came as a surprise. Such a ban is strange to our society. Unlike in France, where it has long been under the spotlight, the hijab had until very recently never been prohibited in India.

  Karnataka state is known for its diverse society and pluralistic culture, with the two major religious groups, Hindus and Muslims, historically coexisting, along with a wide spectrum of other religious groups.

  However, the roots of the Karnataka hijab controversy are quite deep, and are linked to growing Islamophobia. Those in power have ignited a sectarian fuse all over India in every possible way. Right now, Karnataka state also has a right-wing government, which has created fertile ground for strain in Hindu-Muslim relationships.

  To them, the hijab ban is just another tool to remain in power. It is tied to current political events, notably the upcoming December election. Right-wing politicians fabricate issues that target Muslims, who are depicted as the ‘disruptive other’, to divert people’s attention from dire economic conditions. The hijab ban did the job well, as it captured media attention. Sensational media coverage only added fuel to the fire.

  How do you view the hijab ban from a gendered perspective?

  The hijab ban is a complete violation of women’s rights to express their own identities. It should be my choice alone whether to wear the hijab or not. I am a believing and practising Muslim and I don’t wear the hijab. Muslim women of my generation usually did not wear the hijab, but younger generations of Muslim women across the globe do. I see it as a search for an identity in the face of the charged atmosphere created by Islamophobia. Indian Muslim women have worn the hijab for about a quarter of a century.

  We don’t oppose school uniforms because there is good reason for them, especially in a country such as India and all other South Asian countries, where both religious diversity and social inequality lead to differences in dress. But the use of the hijab in educational institutions had never been put to debate before the current Karnataka right-wing government suddenly considered it a violation of the school uniform rules.

  As I said, in my generation very few girls wore the hijab, and therefore my uniform was skirt and blouse, which was acceptable at the time. Later, when girls started wearing the hijab, the situation escalated from establishing that their hijab should match the school uniform colours to starting to throw them out of schools.

  What is the overall status of Indian Muslims as a minority?

  As a former member of government, I observed the status of minorities change over time. From 2004 to 2014 I was a member of a now-extinct Planning Commission that was entrusted, among other responsibilities, with bringing minorities up to mark with society in every way possible. For ten years, we devised all kinds of schemes in the areas of education, employment and health, and tried to ensure minorities made the most of them. Our main tasks were to make these plans and ensure their implementation across the country by persuading the governments of India’s states to embrace them.

  Change was slow because we did not have the power to force implementation. A key moment was when the government commissioned a report on the status of Muslims that provided a very candid conclusion by a retired Supreme Court judge. It stated that India’s 200 million Muslims, the second largest Muslim population in the world, had the lowest status on all social and economic parameters when compared to other religious groups. It should have been a wake-up call for the Indian government.

  But since then, it has only got worse. Recent so-called ‘Hindu religious gatherings’ include a call for the genocide of Muslims. Some have suggested that the saffron flag should replace India’s national flag. Many decisions have been made in violation of the constitution. This is an extremely difficult moment for Muslims in India. 

  And the hijab ban is very much part of Muslim marginalisation. Muslims are being driven to a corner and targeted by a right-wing government that demonises them to boost their support and remain in power.

  How has civil society responded to the ban controversy?

  Many CSOs have raised the issue and protested against the ban. Voices have also raised internationally, both from civil society and from influential individuals, as was the case of US congressional representative Ilhan Omar. Maybe if they became louder, these voices could drive positive change in the lives of India’s Muslims, which are becoming exceedingly difficult.

  Frankly, at times I feel it is a losing game. 

  All international attention that was paid to the ban has damaged the image of India without really making a dent on those in power, who only care about the upcoming general elections.

  Civic space in India is rated ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
  Get in touch with the Muslim Women’s Forum through itswebsite and follow@syedaIndia on Twitter.

• INDIA: ‘The once-cosmopolitan state of Manipur is now divided into two rival communities’

  

  CIVICUS speaks about ethnic violence and a humanitarian crisis in the Indian state of Manipur withMangneo Lhungdim and Sulekha Thapa, Executive Director and Deputy Director of Oasis India.

  Founded in 1994, Oasis India is a civil society organisation (CSO) working to prevent human trafficking and other forms of violence against women and children and support people so they can flourish in their community. Oasis India has also been involved inemergency relief work in Manipur.

   

  What triggered ethnic violence in Manipur state?

  Manipur and a few other northeastern states of India endured severe ethnic violence until the mid-1990s and into the early 2000s. But over the past two decades rights-based reconciliation and development efforts gained momentum, including infrastructure development initiatives that ultimately benefited local communities.

  In this new context, the conflict between the majority Meitei people living in the Imphal Valley and the Kuki-Zo tribal community from the surrounding hills, now into its eighth month, could definitely have been prevented. As retired military and police officers have claimed, public order could and should have been restored within the first month of the conflict in May 2023. The state administration, supported by central security forces, had the capacity to contain the violence and prevent further displacement and killings.

  The conflict is believed to be a collateral outcome of valley Meitei people demanding inclusion on the Scheduled Tribes list under the Constitution of India, which tribal communities interpreted as an attempt to grab their land. On 3 May 2023, the tribals of Manipur, under the aegis of All Tribal Students Union Manipur, carried out a protest march in most hill districts, including Churachandpur. Violent incidents during the Churachandpur march spiralled and spread statewide, turning into senseless killings, arson and displacement.

  It’s difficult to identify particular reasons behind this outbreak of violence since the media coverage was initially limited and subsequent reports by independent journalists gave mixed messages and focused primarily on day-to-day events. Nevertheless, the government must fully acknowledge its responsibility and admit that it bears significant blame for such escalation of a latent ethnic conflict.

  The once-cosmopolitan state of Manipur is now divided into two rival communities and there’s no prospect of the conflict ending any time soon, as there are no substantial peacebuilding efforts by the state or national government. The only hope of restoring normality in life and livelihoods in Manipur comes from collaborative efforts undertaken by local CSOs and leaders.

  What’s the current situation on the ground?

  The situation is relatively more stable now than during the initial three to four months of the conflict, but it still remains challenging. The deployment of over 50,000 central security personnel has led to increased militarisation.

  The violence affects every aspect of the lives of people of all ages.

  Agriculture is the primary occupation in the region, but a majority of farmers missed the sowing and harvest seasons due to curfew regulations and lack of resources. This has deprived them of earnings to meet the basic needs of their families and resulted in shortages of staples.

  Over 60,000 people have been forcibly displaced and currently stay in camps where CSOs are the primary providers of humanitarian aid. Road communications from Manipur’s capital city, Imphal, to affected districts are severed, which complicates the delivery of relief and affects local businesses.

  The strict curfew forced schools to close, causing children to miss several months of education and delaying the start of the new academic year. Healthcare services have also been disrupted. Even burying the dead was impossible for a long period, though some improvement has been noted over the past few days, when the remains of 64 people were taken back to their homelands.

  The emotional impact on the residents of Manipur is profound. People have lived in fear and anxiety for a long time, and many have lost family members or their homes.

  How has Indian civil society, including Oasis, worked to address the humanitarian crisis?

  Several Indian CSOs have responded to the humanitarian needs in both the hills and valley districts of Manipur. In the hill districts, the primary providers have been local churches, national aid agencies, volunteers and philanthropic organisations. Many families continue to rely on supplies and assistance provided by civil society and the neighbouring states of Assam, Mizoram and Nagaland.

  Civil society is working to improve the lives of internally displaced people sheltered in relief camps. Those in Churachandpur, for instance, receive vocational training, including tailoring and computer courses. Those who already have specific skills are provided with craft materials such as wool and weaving sets, to knit sweaters and woollen caps, while others have received bamboo wood and plastic knitting wire to make stools. This has become a source of income for many people, making a huge difference in their lives.

   

  What challenges have you faced in doing your work?

  For Oasis India and various aid agencies, the primary challenge has been delivering relief to the valley areas of Manipur, as the national highway was cut off, making it impossible to transport essential supplies without a security convoy. Food and hygiene kits were mainly sourced from neighbouring Mizoram and Nagaland, incurring high costs and taking 15 to 17 hours on a rough road to deliver supplies to tribal districts.

  Over time, Oasis started to assist people in relief camps but could only help displaced people from the Kuki-Zo tribes. Despite efforts by our senior management to overcome obstacles, there have continued to be security challenges in reaching out to the Meitei community.

  Yet another significant problem lies in mobilising resources for relief from national and international donors. The conflict’s nature as being between ethnic communities, which has been projected as having a political colour, has caused many funders to shy away.

  What should be done to resolve the conflict, and how should the international community help?

  International aid is insufficient. Since May 2023, neither the European Commission’s Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations department nor the United Nations Children's Fund have stepped in to provide humanitarian assistance to Manipur. The same is true for the Prime Minister National Relief Fund and the Prime Minister's Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund. The international community must collaborate with local CSOs that continue taking the lead in providing aid.

  For a genuine resolution to the conflict, both the Kuki-Zo and Meitei communities must come to the table, engage in dialogue and avoid any hate speech, and collaborate to establish peaceful coexistence. To facilitate this, a ceasefire should be agreed at all buffer zones. Given the loss of trust in the state government by the tribal Kuki-Zo people, an independent empowered authority could potentially broker a ceasefire between the two warring communities. There are enough sensible people and peace-loving activists in both communities who can play critical roles in bringing about reconciliation and peace.

  To put an end to the violence and prevent its repetition, perpetrators, regardless of ethnicity, should be held accountable. The Supreme Court has ordered the formation of at least 42 special investigation teams to prosecute conflict-related crimes, so at least there’s hope in this regard.

   

  ---

  Civic space in India is rated ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.

  Get in touch with Oasis India through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow@Oasisatindia on Twitter.

  The opinions expressed in this interview are those of the interviewee and do not necessarily reflect the views of CIVICUS.

• INDIA: ‘We have achieved a historic labour rights win for female Dalit workers’

  CIVICUS speaks about a recent labour rights victory in India’s garment industry with Jeeva M, General Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Textile and Common Labour Union (TTCU).

  TTCU is a women-led independent and majority Dalit trade union of textile workers that represents 11,000 female workers in Tamil Nadu, India. Jeeva, who hails from the Dalit community, has worked for more than five years in the Tamil Nadu textile industry, including at Eastman Exports. She is a founding member of TTCU and has led struggles for decent work and violence-free workplaces in the garment industry for more than a decade.

  What is the Dindigul Agreement, and how significant is it?

  The Dindigul Agreement was signed in April 2021 by TTCU and Eastman Exports, one of the largest textile producers in India, which supplies knitwear, apparel and accessories to major global clothing brands. Its aim is to end caste-based and gender-based violence and harassment (GBVH) at Eastman factories and spinning mills in Dindigul, a city in India’s Tamil Nadu state.

  This is a historic labour rights win for around 5,000 mostly female Dalit workers, who are placed at the bottom of India’s caste system.

  The Dindigul Agreement includes an enforceable brand agreement (EBA), a type of legally binding agreement in which multinational companies commit to use their supply chain relationships to support a worker-led or union-led programme at particular factories or worksites. In this case, TTCU, the Asia Floor Wage Alliance (AFWA) and Global Labour Justice-International Labour Rights Forum (GLJ-ILRF) have signed an EBA with the multinational fashion company H&M, which requires H&M to support and enforce the Dindigul Agreement. If Eastman Exports violates its commitments, H&M must take steps to penalise the company, including by reducing business, until it comes into compliance.

  This agreement is the first of its kind in India, the only EBA to cover spinning mills and the first to include explicit protections against caste-based discrimination, a problem that intensified during the pandemic.

  The Dindigul Agreement is in line with the International Labour Organization’s Convention 190 concerning the elimination of violence and harassment in the workplace. It creates structures that will empower female workers, supported by their union, to monitor and seek redress for GBVH. It also provides a new model for brands, suppliers and trade unions to cooperate to prevent and respond to GBVH in garment supply chains.

  What tipped the balance in favour of the agreement after so many years of efforts?

  Civil society has advocated for better working conditions for Dalit workers for many years, but it was not until the murder of Jeyasre Kathiravel, a Dalit woman garment worker and member of TTCU, that we succeeded in addressing the extreme problems of GBVH pervasive in this industry. The killing of Jeyasre by her supervisor in January 2021 prompted TTCU to shed light on the situation at the factory where she was killed.

  In response, TTCU, AFWA and GLJ-ILRF formed a unique partnership and launched the #JusticeforJeyasre campaign in India and other Asian countries as well as in Europe and the USA. Over 90 international unions, labour groups and women’s rights organisations joined to urge international brands and Eastman Exports to sign a binding agreement to end GBVH.

  A year-long campaign ensued, including an international vigil for Jeyasre held across 33 countries and an 11-city speaking tour across the USA to raise awareness about her case and the need to address GBVH in global supply chains. This enabled the civil society coalition to lead the negotiations that concluded with the historic agreement.

  What other challenges do Dalit workers face in India, and what needs to be done to improve their situations?

  Caste discrimination permeates every aspect of society. Due to its systemic nature, workplaces and supply chains are likely to be affected by it unless special measures to counter it are put in place.

  For instance, Dalit workers experience poorer working conditions than non-Dalits, including longer working hours, sexual harassment, lower wages, dirtier or more hazardous tasks and abusive language and gestures. We also face discrimination at the hiring stage – for instance, qualified applicants from Dalit communities are not considered for skilled jobs – and encounter discrimination in accessing services and utilities offered by the employer, such as housing, healthcare and education and training.

  With approximately 80 per cent of the bonded workforce coming from the Dalit community, strong measures need to be put in place to address bonded or forced labour and to ensure that employment in this sector is not forced.

  Important measures to advance Dalit workers’ labour rights include ensuring the freedom of association and collective bargaining, improving working conditions, paying living wages and implementing binding agreements such as the Dindigul Agreement to address caste-based discrimination and GBVH in sectors where the workforce is mostly made up of Dalit women.

  What’s next for the civil society groups involved in the Dindigul Agreement?

  Through the campaign and negotiation process, TTCU built strong forward momentum and gained respect from the factory and brands. TTCU, AFWA and GLJ-ILRF have built a powerful coalition of unions, women’s rights groups and Dalit rights advocates, among others. Now the agreements have been signed, we need to keep that momentum. We will continue to keep our allies engaged in the implementation phase and as we work to drive industry-wide change.

  We see the Dindigul Agreement as part of a regional movement against GBVH in garment supply chains. We plan to use it as a model for organising against GBVH across the industry and the region. We are already calling on more brands to join this agreement and working with them to expand it. There will surely be challenges, but we are confident we will overcome them.

  Civic space in India is rated ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.
  Get in touch with AFWA through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow@asia_floorwage,@tamil_labour and@GLJhub on Twitter. 

• INDIA: “Las organizaciones de la sociedad civil que se atreven a decirle la verdad al poder son atacadas”

  CIVICUS habla con la abogada e investigadora de derechos humanos Mrinal Sharma acerca del estado de las libertades cívicas en India. Mrinal trabaja ayudando a personas defensoras de derechos humanos ilegalmente detenidas y a solicitantes de asilo, refugiados y apátridas en India. Trabajó como Asesora de Políticsa en Amnistía Internacional India hasta que el gobierno de este país obligó a la organización a cerrar en octubre de 2020. Su trabajo con Amnistía se enfocó en las personas privadas arbitrariamente de su nacionalidad en Assam, en las barreras para el acceso a la justicia en Cachemira y en la demonización de las minorías en toda India. Mrinal había trabajado anteriormente en la Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative y en la Refugee Solidarity Network.

  ¿Se están volviendo más restrictivas las condiciones para ejercer las libertades de asociación, reunión pacífica y expresión bajo el gobierno del primer ministro Narendra Modi?

  Ciertamente, el espacio cívico en la India ha experimentado un deterioro gradual bajo el gobierno de Modi. El 90% de los delitos de odio perpetrados en la última década se produjeron después de 2014, es decir, durante el gobierno de Modi. Según la base de datos sobre sedición de Artículo 14, desde 2010 11.000 personas han sido acusadas de sedición en la India. El 96% de los casos de sedición iniciados desde 2010 por criticar al gobierno nacional y a sus líderes fueron iniciados durante el gobierno de Modi. La India no es ajena a la tendencia al bloqueo deliberado del acceso a internet y ostenta el récord de haber impuesto el mayor número de bloqueos de internet en todo el mundo. Según el Internet Shutdown Tracker del Software Freedom Legal Centre, la cantidad de bloqueos de internet ha aumentado constantemente desde 2014. Estos alcanzaron su punto máximo en 2019, lo cual dio cuenta del prolongado apagón de las comunicaciones impuesto por el gobierno indio en Jammu y Cachemira. Además, entre 2012 y 2020, 148 de los 385 bloqueos de internet fueron impuestos para contener “situaciones de orden público” en curso, un eufemismo que suele utilizarse en referencia a las protestas pacíficas. Estos datos indican la magnitud de las restricciones impuestas sobre las libertades de asociación, reunión pacífica y expresión en la India.

  Además, el uso de leyes restrictivas tales como la Ley de Prevención de Actividades Ilegales (UAPA), la Ley de Seguridad Nacional, la Ley de Seguridad Pública y otras leyes de detención preventiva para frenar las protestas contra las políticas discriminatorias del gobierno también se ha convertido en algo habitual. Ni siquiera esta virulenta pandemia ha disuadido al gobierno indio de detener o mantener detenidas a personas defensoras de derechos humanos de avanzada edad o en mal estado de salud, a pesar de la situación de hacinamiento en las cárceles. En julio de 2020, Varavara Rao, un poeta y activista de 81 años que fue acusado en virtud de la UAPA por su presunta participación en actos de violencia ocurridos durante las celebraciones de Bhima Koregaon en 2018, dio positivo para el COVID-19 mientras estaba detenido en una prisión superpoblada de Maharashtra. Tras pasar más de dos años y medio detenido a la espera de juicio y de realizar múltiples intentos fallidos para obtener la libertad bajo fianza, recientemente fue puesto en libertad por seis meses en consideración de su precario estado de salud. Del mismo modo, Safoora Zargar, una investigadora académica que estaba embarazada de tres meses fue acusada bajo la UAPA y detenida en otra prisión superpoblada de Delhi por protestar pacíficamente contra la Ley de Enmienda de la Ciudadanía (CAA). Fue necesario llevar a cabo una intensa campaña pública internacional, nacional y local para que fuera puesta en libertad bajo fianza. Muchos estudiantes siguen detenidos.

  La pandemia ha sido utilizada para activar leyes draconianas de “emergencia”. Estas leyes otorgan amplios poderes al gobierno para detener y encarcelar a cualquiera que infrinja el confinamiento punitivo impuesto para frenar la propagación del virus. Estas leyes fueron aplicadas en forma arbitraria contra periodistas, trabajadores esenciales y personas pertenecientes a grupos excluidos. Algunos fueron incluso torturados y asesinados mientras estaban bajo custodia policial. Según un informe reciente del Proyecto de Justicia Penal y Responsabilidad Policial, la mayoría de los informes contravencionales elevados durante el confinamiento en el estado de Madhya Pradesh fueron contra peatones, y en particular contra vendedores ambulantes y personas en vehículos de dos ruedas, lo cual dejó en evidencia la aplicación discriminatoria de las leyes de emergencia.

  Cabe señalar que la aplicación de estas leyes es un hilo conductor que une a sucesivos gobiernos. La mayoría de estas leyes fueron aprobadas por el gobierno anterior; el gobierno actual simplemente las ha utilizado para atacar a grupos sociales específicos.

  ¿Cuáles son los principales motivos que dan cuenta de los ataques contra activistas y organizaciones de la sociedad civil (OSC)?

  La sociedad civil desempeña un rol muy importante a la hora de acortar distancias entre derechos y derechohabientes. Al hacer ese trabajo, también comprende los defectos de los sistemas sociales y económicos y tiene poder para cambiar el statu quo exigiendo el fin de las desigualdades y desmantelando las estructuras de poder existentes, cosa que ha hecho con éxito en el pasado. Los líderes políticos demonizan a las OSC, desacreditan su trabajo y experiencia y las convierten en chivos expiatorios en función de sus creencias políticas para adquirir poder y beneficiarse políticamente.

  Estos constantes ataques adoptan la forma de restricciones ilegales y uso de términos vagos e imprecisos para describir a las personas defensoras de derechos humanos, a los manifestantes pacíficos y a sus motivaciones, y así moldear a la opinión pública. Entre esos términos se cuentan los de “antinacional”, “naxal urbano” y el más reciente “aandolanjivis” (manifestantes profesionales). Las OSC también son descritas como portadoras de una “ideología extranjera destructiva”, como una elite corrupta y como ese “otro” que trabaja contra el pueblo, mientras que quienes lideran esta demonización son presentados como representantes de ese “pueblo”. Esto aviva aún más las hostilidades entre grupos sociales, distrae al público de las verdaderas taras de la sociedad y habilita la adopción de políticas discriminatorias. Además, la restricción selectiva del derecho de las personas a las libertades de expresión y asociación con el objeto de silenciar las críticas y perpetuar la narrativa del gobierno también conduce efectivamente a la polarización, que es un terreno fértil para promover agendas políticas estrechas.

  ¿Qué cuestiones de derechos humanos son las que más preocupan a Amnistía Internacional en la India?

  La flagrante criminalización del disenso en la India sigue siendo muy preocupante. Las interrupciones masivas de Internet, el uso excesivo, innecesario y a menudo ilegal de la fuerza por parte de la policía y las detenciones ilegales en virtud de las leyes antiterroristas se han convertido en algo demasiado habitual. Dan prueba de ello la respuesta de mano dura del gobierno frente a las protestas pacíficas contra la decisión unilateral de despojar a Jammu y Cachemira de su autonomía constitucionalmente garantizada, en medio de un apagón total de las comunicaciones, la promulgación de la discriminatoria CAA y, más recientemente, la aprobación de tres leyes agrícolas que pretenden desregular la agricultura en la India.

  Desde septiembre de 2020, más de 160 agricultores han muerto mientras protestaban pacíficamente contra las leyes agrícolas. Muchos jóvenes activistas que apoyan a los agricultores están detenidos bajo cargos de sedición. Al menos 50 personas murieron en los disturbios que estallaron en el noreste de Delhi en febrero de 2020. Además, la burbuja de noticias falsas y desinformación facilitada por los modelos de negocios de las grandes empresas tecnológicas, que están basados en la vigilancia, combinada con marcos débiles para la protección de los datos, alimenta constantemente la política de demonización en la India.

  También son preocupantes las represalias del Estado contra quienes denuncian violaciones y delitos de casta, así como la impunidad generalizada por los asesinatos y ataques contra minorías religiosas perpetrados por turbas de civiles armados y policías. A modo de ejemplo, a pesar de las pruebas irrefutables, grabadas en video, que muestran la complicidad de agentes de policía en los disturbios producidos en el noreste de Delhi en febrero de 2020, hasta ahora no hay ningún policía procesado. Al mismo tiempo que se ignoran sistemáticamente la violencia y el discurso de odio de los partidarios de la CAA, los manifestantes contrarios a la CAA siguen siendo acosados e intimidados por el gobierno.

  ¿Podría contarnos acerca de la Ley de Regulación de las Contribuciones Extranjeras (FCRA) y su impacto sobre la sociedad civil?

  La FCRA regula las donaciones extranjeras en la India. Ostensiblemente, fue promulgada para regular las donaciones extranjeras a los partidos políticos y controlar la influencia extranjera en las elecciones indias. Enmendada en múltiples ocasiones desde su aprobación en 2010, se ha convertido en un arma eficaz en manos del gobierno para sofocar a la sociedad civil india. Su versión más reciente impone restricciones discriminatorias al acceso de las OSC a financiamiento, imponiendo procedimientos de autorización onerosos, altamente burocráticos y difíciles de realizar. Desde 2011, según lo admite el propio gobierno, se han cancelado las licencias de más de 20.000 OSC. Las organizaciones que se atreven a decirle la verdad al poder o a cuestionar las violaciones de derechos humanos, como es el caso de Amnistía Internacional India, son atacadas con la FCRA mediante acusaciones motivadas políticamente.

  La última modificación de la FCRA, aprobada en plena pandemia, ha ahogado aún más a la sociedad civil. Prohíbe que los funcionarios públicos reciban fondos extranjeros; prohíbe la transferencia de fondos extranjeros de una organización o individuo a otro, más allá de que cuenten con licencia bajo la FCRA; reduce el límite de utilización del rubro de “gastos administrativos” del 50% al 20%; amplía el periodo de suspensión de la licencia para OSC otorgada por la FCRA de 180 días a un año; y establece que las contribuciones extranjeras solo pueden ser recibidas mediante una cuenta bancaria de la OSC marcada por la FCRA en una sucursal designada del banco estatal situada en Delhi.

  Estas enmiendas estigmatizarán efectivamente la asociación de funcionarios públicos con organizaciones sin fines de lucro, ahogarán las colaboraciones entre OSC y, en particular, aquellas que involucren a OSC más pequeñas y de base, reducirán los fondos asignados para pagar sueldos del personal y realizar proyectos en el terreno que conlleven gastos de viaje, y privarán a las OSC de fondos hasta que el gobierno complete su investigación por presuntas violaciones a la FCRA. También obstaculizarán el trabajo de las OSC que tienen su sede fuera de Nueva Delhi, que constituyen aproximadamente el 93% de s las OSC registradas en la India, ya que imponen innecesarios gastos de viaje, los cuales además se contarían dentro del límite de 20% para gastos administrativos.

  El gobierno tiene la obligación de justificar la imposición de estas estrictas restricciones y la vulneración de los derechos humanos de las personas y organizaciones a asociarse y expresarse libremente. Tiene que demostrar que estas restricciones son realmente legítimas, razonables y proporcionales al daño que buscan evitar, pero no lo ha hecho. De hecho, hizo caso omiso de los reclamos de la sociedad civil para que el proyecto de ley fuera sometido a un comité de personas expertas para generar mayor debate antes de su aprobación. El debate en el Parlamento también fue mínimo.

  La FCRA y sus enmiendas más recientes han sido muy criticadas por la comunidad internacional, y por personalidades como Maina Kiai, ex Relator Especial de las Naciones Unidas (ONU) sobre los derechos a la libertad de reunión pacífica y de asociación, y Michelle Bachelet, Alta Comisionada de la ONU para los derechos humanos, por ser demasiado amplias y vagas. Pero el gobierno no ha hecho caso. A nivel nacional, la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDH) también ha pedido explicaciones por la cancelación masiva de licencias de la FCRA para las OSC.

  Paradójicamente, los partidos políticos siguen recibiendo fondos extranjeros, lo cual antes estaba prohibido, y lo hacen con mínimas restricciones. De hecho, a pesar de que los partidos políticos violan recurrentemente la FCRA, ahora no solamente les resulta más fácil recibir fondos, sino que además el proceso se ha vuelto mucho más opaco. A modo de ejemplo, en 2014 el Tribunal Superior de Delhi dictaminó que el partido gobernante, Bharatiya Janata, y el Congreso Nacional Indio habían violado la FCRA al aceptar fondos extranjeros. En 2016 y luego en 2018, el gobierno indio modificó la FCRA para legalizar el financiamiento extranjero para los partidos políticos y eximir a éstos del escrutinio no solo de los fondos que les llegaran en el futuro, sino también de los que ya les habían sido donados en el pasado. En diciembre de 2020, la Comisión Central de Información, a cargo de la implementación de la Ley de Derecho a la Información de 2005, dictaminó que la revelación pública de la identidad de los donantes de los partidos políticos no sirve a ningún interés público, y por lo tanto no es necesaria.

  Esta clara diferencia entre el trato que reciben los partidos políticos y las OSC debería bastar para entender las turbias motivaciones subyacentes a la FCRA.

  ¿Por qué Amnistía India fue obligada a cerrar, y cuáles han sido las consecuencias?

  Amnistía Internacional India se vio obligada a cerrar como represalia por la publicación de dos informes críticos que ponían de manifiesto la situación de derechos humanos en Cachemira y destacaban el papel de la policía de Delhi en los disturbios que tuvieron lugar en el noreste de Delhi en febrero de 2020. Poco después de que publicara estos informes, todas sus cuentas bancarias fueron congeladas. El gobierno no proporcionó ninguna advertencia ni aviso previo, ni ofreció ninguna razón para congelar las cuentas bancarias. Al no poder acceder a los fondos que había recaudado localmente, a partir de contribuciones de la ciudadanía india, Amnistía Internacional India se vio obligada a suspender todas sus actividades y a despedir a todo su personal.

  Para Amnistía Internacional India el acoso y la intimidación a causa de su trabajo de derechos humanos no era ninguna novedad. Desde 2016 enfrentaba una incesante campaña de desprestigio por parte del gobierno y de los medios de comunicación afines al gobierno. En 2018 soportó un allanamiento de 10 horas de duración por parte de la Dirección de Ejecución, tras el cual se vio obligada a despedir a varios miembros de su personal, lo cual afectó negativamente a su trabajo en la India, y en particular a su labor con comunidades excluidas. Aunque los tribunales emitieron una medida cautelar en favor de la organización, su buen funcionamiento se vio dificultado por la persecución mediática y la reducción de sus capacidades. Es importante señalar que hasta el día de hoy no se han presentado acusaciones formales contra la organización. Un año después, en noviembre de 2019, en medio de rumores de la inminente detención de sus altos funcionarios, las oficinas de Amnistía Internacional India y la residencia de uno de sus directores volvieron sufrir allanamientos, esta vez por parte de la Oficina Central de Investigación, la principal agencia de investigación del país, dependiente del gobierno central. Sin embargo, la organización siguió trabajando, desafiando estos ataques contra ella y sus empleados.

  Pero esta vez los ataques fueron más encarnizados. El impacto inmediato del cierre ha recaído sobre el personal de Amnistía Internacional India -investigadores, responsables de campañas, recaudadores de fondos-, que perdieron sus empleos de la noche a la mañana sin recibir ninguna indemnización, en el contexto de una recesión económica que se ha visto agravada por la pandemia. Los grandes proyectos de investigación y las campañas que llevaba a cabo Amnistía Internacional India se han paralizado. Habría que dejarle en claro al gobierno indio que, con la excusa de sujetar a controles a una supuesta “entidad extranjera”, todo lo que ha hecho es privar de sus medios de vida a muchos de sus propios ciudadanos. Y, lo que es aún más importante, ahora hay una voz menos exigiendo al gobierno indio que rinda cuentas de sus excesos y su inacción.

  ¿Hay otras organizaciones de derechos humanos que estén enfrentando desafíos similares?

  Varias OSC que han cuestionado o criticado las políticas del gobierno han enfrentado desafíos similares en relación con la FCRA. People’s Watch, Indian Social Action Forum, Hazards Centre, Greenpeace India, Sabrang Trust, Navsarjan Trust, Act Now for Harmony and Democracy, Indian Social Action Forum y Lawyers Collective son algunos de los grupos que han recibido acusaciones motivadas políticamente en virtud de la FCRA. Esto no es un accidente. Existe un patrón deliberado de silenciamiento de los grupos de derechos humanos mediante su trato como empresas criminales y la presentación de los disidentes como delincuentes. Lawyers Collective, por ejemplo, ha trabajado ampliamente con las víctimas de los ataques contra musulmanes de 2002 en Gujarat. People’s Watch ha hecho activamente campaña contra los abusos contra personas detenidas. Greenpeace India ha estado a la vanguardia de la lucha por el derecho a la tierra y contra el cambio climático y el impacto medioambiental de la minería del carbón.

  Además de la FCRA, otras leyes draconianas contribuyen a crear un entorno incapacitante para la labor de derechos humanos en India. Entre ellas están la UAPA, la Ley de Seguridad Pública y la Ley de Seguridad Nacional. Anunciadas como leyes antiterroristas o leyes que castigan “delitos contra el Estado”, han creado un sistema de impunidad y constituyen herramientas eficaces para mantener a la gente en la cárcel durante períodos prolongados. El índice de condenas en virtud de estas leyes es realmente bajo. Según la Oficina Nacional de Registros de Delitos, en 2018 más del 93% de los casos iniciados bajo la UAPA seguían pendientes de tratamiento en los tribunales, mientras que la tasa de condenas en virtud de la UAPA era de apenas 27%. Desde 2016, solo siete casos de sedición han terminado en condena. Según una investigación anterior de Amnistía Internacional India, alrededor del 58% de las órdenes de detención dictadas entre 2007 y 2016 en virtud de la Ley de Seguridad Pública, que se aplica en Jammu y Cachemira y permite la detención administrativa sin acusaciones ni juicio, fueron anuladas por el Tribunal Superior de Jammu y Cachemira. Entre marzo de 2016 y julio de 2017, el 81% de las órdenes de detención fueron anuladas. Esto demuestra que estas leyes son utilizadas para privar a las personas de su libertad de movimiento y de expresión durante el tiempo en que sus casos avanzan en los tribunales.

  ¿Qué puede hacer la comunidad internacional para apoyar a los grupos de derechos humanos y ampliar el espacio cívico en la India?

  En términos generales, la comunidad internacional debe amplificar las voces de quienes están al frente de la lucha contra las violaciones de derechos humanos en la India. Al mismo tiempo, debe dejar de asumir una posición moral elevada y desestimar las preocupaciones de la gente, reales o proyectadas, sobre la seguridad, el bienestar y el desarrollo. En cambio, debe centrarse en combatir el discurso que transforma a la sociedad civil en un “otro” rechazado y proyectar una visión de un mundo más justo, sostenible y equitativo – un mundo no puede lograrse en ausencia de una sociedad civil robusta que trabaje sin descanso para la gente a lo largo y a lo ancho del país. También debe mantenerse más cerca de las comunidades locales.

  En concreto, debe lograr que el Estado indio se responsabilice por todas las obligaciones internacionales en materia de derechos humanos que ha respaldado y aprobado y en las que se basa, mientras pelea por tener un lugar más importante en la mesa. Han pasado 24 años desde que India presentó al Comité de Derechos Humanos de la ONU un informe sobre el cumplimiento de sus obligaciones en virtud del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos, del cual es Estado parte. La CNDH, el principal órgano de vigilancia de los derechos humanos de la India, no alcanza los niveles mínimos establecidos por los Principios de París para las instituciones nacionales de derechos humanos, pero sigue manteniendo una acreditación de categoría A y, por lo tanto, puede participar en el Consejo de Derechos Humanos de la ONU. La comunidad internacional debe exigir sistemáticamente la reforma de la CNDH y exigirle que rinda cuentas de la disminución de la protección de que gozan las personas defensoras de derechos humanos en la India. Los grupos de derechos humanos deberían poder confiar plenamente en las instituciones de derechos humanos de su país.

  El espacio cívico en India es calificado de “represivo” por elCIVICUS Monitor.

  Siga las actualizaciones de Amnistía Internacional sobre la India a través de susitio web.

• India: Alarming assault on civic freedoms in Prime Minister Modi’s second term

  Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s second term in power was sustained by a pattern of repression to undermine democracy and civic space, the global civil society alliance CIVICUS said today. A new CIVICUS Monitor report, published ahead of the 2024 elections, shows that the Indian government used an array of restrictive laws and policies to silence dissent by targeting critics including civil society groups, human rights defenders and independent media.

  The report highlights how civil society organisations have faced an increased crackdown through the cancellation of their registrations, raids and investigations by law enforcement agencies. The authorities also blocked access to foreign funding for civil society groups, critical of the government, through the restrictive Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), which the UN has deemed in contravention of international law and standards.

  Human rights defenders critical of the government were also implicated and jailed in politically motivated cases under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), a draconian anti-terror law. Under the UAPA’s draconian provisions, activists remain in detention for long periods and are often denied bail even on health grounds as exemplified in the Bhima Koregaon case. India also witnessed an increase in attacks and restrictions against independent media and journalists in recent years such as the targeting of NewsClick with raids, searches and seizures by various government agencies.

  “The increasing use of restrictive laws during Prime Minister Modi’s second term to crackdown on civil society, human rights defenders and independent media, highlights a government that has become intolerable of any form of dissent. These laws have become tools for judicial harassment and are incompatible with India’s international human rights obligations as well as India’s Constitution”, said Marianna Belalba Barreto, Research Lead for the CIVICUS Monitor

  CIVICUS also highlights in the report that since the 2019 elections, major protests in India have been met with arbitrary arrests and excessive use of force by the police, including protests against the discriminatory Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) 2019 and the farmers protests.  Authorities used Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a colonial-era provision, to arbitrarily restrict or deny assemblies.  Internet shutdowns were also used to prevent people gathering in protests and fabricated charges were brought against protesters, with some still remaining in detention.

  Human rights work in Kashmir has almost come to a complete standstill due to arrests of activists and continuous harassment of civil society organisations and activists through raids and interrogations. Among them include Khurram Parvez from the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society who has been detained under the UAPA for more than two years. Journalists who report on critical issues in Kashmir have also been targeted.

  “The systematic crackdown on peaceful protests and the jailing of protesters for exercising their right to peaceful assembly shows the erosion of democratic space during Modi’s second term. In Kashmir, the heavy-handed repression by the Indian government against critical voices and the failure to ensure accountability has left the region in a climate of fear”, said Belalba.

  CIVICUS calls on the government to drop all charges against human rights defenders, activists and protesters, and immediately and unconditionally release all those detained; review and amend India’s criminal laws to conform to international law and standards and take steps to ensure that all human rights defenders in India are able to carry out their legitimate activities without any hindrance or fear of reprisals.

  Download the India research brief here.

  Civic space in India is rated as Repressed  by the CIVICUS Monitor

  About the CIVICUS Monitor

  Over twenty organisations collaborate on the CIVICUS Monitor to provide an evidence base for action to improve civic space on all continents. Civic freedoms in 198 countries and territories are categorised as either ‘closed,’ ‘repressed ,’ ‘obstructed ,’ ‘narrowed ’ or ‘open ,’ based on a methodology that combines several data sources on the freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression

• India: Amnesty International Forced to Halt Work

  Government Increasingly Targeting Rights Groups

  Today, CIVICUS joined fourteen other human rights organizations in condemning the Indian government’s actions against Amnesty India and pledged to continue support for local human rights defenders and organizations against the recent crackdown.
  
  Amnesty International India announced that it is halting its work in the country after the Indian government froze its bank accounts in an act of reprisal for the organization’s human rights work. Fifteen international human rights organizations condemned the Indian government’s actions against Amnesty India and pledged to continue support for local human rights defenders and organizations against the recent crackdown.
  
  The Indian government’s actions against Amnesty India are part of increasingly repressive tactics to shut down critical voices and groups working to promote, protect, and uphold fundamental rights, said the Association for Progressive Communications, Global Indian Progressive Alliance, International Commission of Jurists, CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Front Line Defenders, FORUM-ASIA, Foundation the London Story, Hindus for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, International Service for Human Rights, Minority Rights Group, Odhikar, South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR), International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) in the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders.
  
  The Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government has accused Amnesty India of violating laws on foreign funding, a charge the group says is politically motivated and constitutes evidence “that the overbroad legal framework is maliciously activated when human rights defenders and groups challenge the government’s grave inactions and excesses.”
  
  The BJP government has increasingly cracked down on civil society, harassing and bringing politically motivated cases against human rights defenders, academics, student activists, journalists, and others critical of the government under sedition, terrorism, and other repressive laws.
  
  These actions increasingly mimic that of authoritarian regimes, which do not tolerate any criticism and shamelessly target those who dare to speak out. With growing criticism of the government’s discriminatory policies and attacks on the rule of law, the authorities seem more interested in shooting the messenger than addressing the grievances. Women’s rights activists and indigenous and minority human rights defenders have been especially vulnerable. The recent action against Amnesty India highlights the stepped-up pressure and violence felt by local defenders on the ground, regardless of their profile.
  
  The authorities have repeatedly used foreign funding regulations under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), a law broadly condemned for violating international human rights law and standards, to target outspoken groups. United Nations experts on human rights defenders, on freedom of expression, and on freedom of association have urged the government to repeal the law, saying it is “being used more and more to silence organisations involved in advocating civil, political, economic, social, environmental or cultural priorities, which may differ from those backed by the Government.”
  
  Yet, the Indian parliament amended the FCRA this month, adding further onerous governmental oversight, additional regulations and certification processes, and operational requirements that would adversely affect civil society groups and effectively restrict access to foreign funding for small nongovernmental organizations.
  
  A robust, independent, and vocal civil society is indispensable in any democracy to ensure a check on government and to hold it accountable, pushing it to do better. Instead of treating human rights groups as its enemies, the government should work with them to protect the rights of all people and ensure accountability at all levels of government.

  ---

  Civic space in India is currently rated as Repressed by the CIVICUS Monitor

  New report: Punished for speaking up: The ongoing use of restrictive laws to silence dissent in India

  ---

  For more information please contact:

  Head of Advocacy & Campaigns, David Kode

• India: Arbitrarily detained Kashmiri prisoners must be freed 

  While recent steps taken by Indian authorities to decongest prisons in an effort to contain the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak are welcome, the Government should release all unjustly detained prisoners as a matter of priority.

  The fate of hundreds of arbitrarily detained Kashmiri prisoners hangs in the balance as the number of confirmed cases of coronavirus in India passes the 4,000 mark and many more are likely to remain undetected or unreported.

  Inmates and prison staff, who live in confined spaces and in close proximity with others, remain extremely vulnerable to COVID-19. While the rest of the country is instructed to respect social isolation and hygiene rules, basic measures like hand washing - let alone physical distancing - are just not possible for prisoners.

  Under international law, India has an obligation to ensure the physical and mental health and well-being of inmates. However, with an occupancy rate of over 117%, precarious hygienic conditions and inadequate health services, the overcrowded Indian prisons constitute the perfect environment for the spread of coronavirus. 

  In a bid to contain the spread of the disease among inmates and prison staff, the Supreme Court asked state governments on 23 March 2020 to take steps to decongest the country’s prison system by considering granting parole to those convicted or charged with offenses carrying jail terms of up to seven years.

  The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet also called on governments to “examine ways to release those particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, among them older detainees and those who are sick, as well as low-risk offenders.”

  Various state governments in India have now begun releasing detainees. However, there is a concern that hundreds of Kashmiri youth, journalists, political leaders, human right defenders and others arbitrarily arrested in the course of 2019, including following the repeal of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution on 5 August 2019, will not be among those benefiting from the measure. Article 370 provided special status to Jammu & Kashmir. 

  Human rights groups and UN experts have repeatedly called for the release as a matter of priority of “those detained without sufficient legal basis, including political prisoners and others detained simply for expressing critical or dissenting views.” 

  Last month, the Ministry of Home Affairs revealed that 7,357 persons had been arrested in Jammu & Kashmir since 5 August 2019. While the majority have since been released, hundreds are still detained under sections 107 and 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and the Public Security Act (PSA), a controversial law which allows the administrative detention of any individual for up to two years without charge or trial. Reportedly, many of those still detained are minors.

  Many of those detained were transferred to prisons all across India, thousands of kilometers away from their homes, hampering their lawyers’ and relatives’ ability to visit them. Some of the families, often too poor to afford to travel, have been left with nothing but concerns over the physical and psychological well-being of their loved ones.

  Mr. Miyan Abdul Qayoom, a human rights lawyer and President of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court Bar Association, was also cut off from his family and lawyer. Detained since 4 August 2019 in India's Uttar Pradesh State, he was transferred to Tihar jail in New Delhi following a deterioration of his health. Mr. Qayoom, 70, suffers from diabetes, double vessel heart disease, and kidney problems. 

  Mr. Ghulam Mohammed Bhat was also transferred to a jail in Uttar Pradesh. In December 2019, he died thousands of kilometers away from his home at the age of 65 due to lack of medical care.

  With the entire country in a lockdown and a ban on prison visits for the duration of the outbreak imposed, inmates are more isolated from the outside world than ever. In such a situation, prison authorities must ensure that alternative means of communication, such as videoconferencing, phone calls and emails, are allowed. However, this has not often been the case. Especially in Jammu & Kashmir, where full internet services are yet to be restored after a communication blackout imposed on the population on 5 August 2019, contacts between inmates and the outside world are even more limited. 

  The isolation of inmates from the outside world is even more alarming in light of the huge number of deaths in custody, pointing towards the use of torture and ill-treatment in Indian prisons. Allegations of torture and ill-treatment against Kashmiri prisoners as part of a decades-long pattern of abuses have been repeatedly denounced by human rights groups and UN bodies.

  We remind Indian authorities that all measures designed to halt the spread of the virus must respect the fundamental human rights of every individual and we call on the Government to:

  • Immediately release all arbitrarily detained prisoners, including journalists, human rights defenders, political leaders and others detained simply for expressing critical or dissenting views, including Mr. Miyan Abdul Qayoom and all those arrested after 5 August 2019 in Jammu & Kashmir;
  • Consider releasing those particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, among them older detainees and those who are sick, as well as low-risk offenders;
  • Provide adequate healthcare and implement preventive measures, such as the screening of all detainees and the confinement of vulnerable inmates, to ensure the safety of all prisoners and prison staff;
  • Take measures to ensure that, upon release, inmates are medically screened and provided with adequate care and proper follow-up, including health monitoring; 
  • Ensure the availability to all prisoners of alternative measures to prison visits (e.g. video conferencing, more telephone access);
  • Ensure that safeguards against torture and ill-treatment of people in custody, including access to lawyers and medical examinations, are maintained during the emergency; and
  • Restore full access to high-speed internet in Jammu & Kashmir.

  We would like to stress that these are not issues circumscribed to the coronavirus emergency. No one must ever be tortured, ill-treated, or arbitrarily deprived of their liberty. All prisoners must be able to enjoy decent detention conditions, have access to health care, legal representation and the support of their families, even in normal times. 

  These are not new issues. The Government of India must urgently address them, regardless of the threat of a global pandemic. A truly healthy society is one where fundamental rights are enjoyed by all, in time of crisis and beyond.

  • Amnesty International India 
  • Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
  • Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP)
  • CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation 
  • International Commissions of Jurists (ICJ)
  • International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
  • World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)
• India: Chronology of harassment against human rights defender Khurram Parvez

  Human rights defender Khurram Parvez, 44, is the Programme Coordinator of the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) which is a coalition of various campaign, research and advocacy organisations based in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir which monitor and investigate human right abuses. He is also the Chairperson of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearance (AFAD) a collective of non-governmental organisations from ten Asian countries that campaign on the issue of enforced disappearances.

  Khurram has documented serious human rights violations in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, including enforced disappearances and unlawful killings. He was detained in November 2021 and is accused ofbeing in contact with individuals linked to a Pakistani militant group. He is facing multiple charges  under the Penal Code and draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 (UAPA), related to conspiracy and terrorism, which CIVICUS believes have been trumped up by the authorities because of his activism.

  He has faced systematic harassment to advocate against human rights violations in Indian administered Jammu and Kashmir. In September 2016, the Indian authorities arrested him a day after he was barred from travelling to Switzerland to attend the 33rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council. He was charged under the draconian Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA), which allows detention without charge for up to two years. He was released after 76 days in detention.

  In October 2020, nine simultaneous raids were conducted by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on the houses and offices of several human rights defenders, non-governmental organisations and newspapers in Jammu and Kashmir - including the house of Khurram Parvez.

  Updated September 2023

  2021

  22 November 2021: Officials from the National Investigation Agency (NIA), assisted by the local police, conducted raids on the house of Khurram Parvez and the JKCCS office in the city of Srinagar, in Jammu and Kashmir Union Territory, for approximately 14 hours. Parvez’s mobile phone, laptop, and several books were seized. On the evening of the same day, Khurram Parvez was taken for questioning to the premises of the NIA in Srinagar. At around 6pm, his family members received a phone call from NIA officers who requested them to bring him clothes. Upon arrival at the premises of the NIA they were given an arrest memo for Parvez, which was issued on the basis of a First Information Report (FIR) lodged by the NIA on 6 November 2021.

  According to the arrest memo, Khurram Parvez faces charges of “criminal conspiracy”, “waging war against the government of India”, “punishment for conspiracy to wage war against the government of India” (Sections 120B, 121, and 121A of the Indian Penal Code, respectively), and “raising funds for terror activities”, “punishment for conspiracy”, “recruiting any person or persons for commission of a terrorist act”, “offence relating to membership of a terrorist organisation” and “offence of raising funds for terrorist organisations” (Sections 17, 18, 18B, 38, and 40 of the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), respectively).

  24 November 2021: Khurram Parvez was taken to New Delhi where he remained detained under NIA’s custody.

  30 November 2021:Appeared at the NIA court.

  2 December 2021: United Nations human rights experts expressed concern over the arrest of Khurram Parvez under the stringent UAPA anti-terror law and called for his release. They said: “We are concerned that one month after Mr. Parvez’s arrest, he is still deprived of liberty in what appears to be a new incident of retaliation for his legitimate activities as a human rights defender and because he has spoken out about violations.”

  4 December 2021: Khurram Parvez appeared before the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Special Court in New Delhi, after 12 days under NIA’s custody. Judge Parveen Singh extended his detention for another 20 days and ordered that he be transferred to the Tihar maximum security prison, in New Delhi.

  25 December 2021: Judicial custody extended for 30 days until 21 January 2022.

  2022

  24 January 2021:Judicial custody extended for 40 days. His family was barred from meeting him due to COVID-19.

  12 February 2022:The court extended his judicial custody for a further 40 days.

  24 March 2022: An NIA Court extended his judicial custody for 50 days.

  27 March 2022: The NIA carried out another raid of the residence of Khurram in Srinagar.

  13 May 2022: The NIA filed a charge sheet against Khurram Parvez and seven others before the NIA Special Court in New Delhi. He was charged under Sections 120B and 121A of the Indian Penal Code (“criminal conspiracy” and “punishment for conspiracy to wage war against the government of India”, respectively), Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (“taking gratification, in order, by corrupt or illegal means, to influence public servant”) and Sections 13, 18, 18B, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) (“unlawful activities”, “conspiracy”, “recruiting any person or persons for commission of a terrorist act”, “offence relating to membership of a terrorist organisation” and “giving support to a terrorist organisation”, respectively). 

  In the chargesheet the authorities accused him and others of supporting a Pakistan based proscribed militant organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) to fund and recruit operatives for providing support in planning and execution of terrorist activities in various parts of India including Jammu & Kashmir.

  21 June 2022: A resolution introduced in the US Congress House of Representatives condemning human rights violations in India highlighted the case of Khurram Parvez

  6 July 2022: Khurram’s first hearing at the NIA Special Court in New Delhi took place. Lawyers were asked if they had received his chargesheet and other documents. The court also set the date for the next hearing

  16 November 2022: Khurram's case was raised by the UN Secretary General in its report on reprisals against individuals seeking to cooperate or having cooperated with the UN, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights.

  21 November 2022: One year anniversary of Khurram's detention. 12 NGOs issue a statement calling for his immediate and unconditional release.

  22 November 2022: UN experts issued a statement stating that the arrest and detention of Khurram Parvez has a chilling effect on civil society, rights activists and journalists in the region, They reiterated their call for his immediate and unconditional release by the Indian Government.

  2023

  19 January 2023: Khurram Parvez won the Martin Ennals Award, one of the world’s most prestigious human rights prizes. The organisation said that Khurram “relentlessly spoke the truth and was an inspiration to civil society and the local population.”

  13 March 2023: Khurram Parvez was interrogated by the NIA on two consecutive days in the week of 13 March 2023 in the Rohini High Security Prison in New Delhi.

  20 March 2023:  Kashmiri human rights defender and journalist Irfan Mehraj was arrested by India’s National Investigation Agency (NIA) on the basis of a First Information Report (FIR) lodged by the NIA in New Delhi on 8 October 2020, under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). On the same day, the NIA published a press release framing the arrest of Irfan Mehraj as part of an “NGO Terror Funding Case”. The statement noted Irfan Mehraj was a “close associate of Khurram Parvez and was working with his organisation JKCCS”. The press release added that “investigations revealed that the JKCCS was funding terror activities in the valley and had also been in propagation of secessionist agenda in the Valley under the garb of protection of human rights”.

  22 March 2023:Khurram Parvez was transferred from Rohini Central Prison to the Patiala House Court in New Delhi, where Irfan Mehraj was produced and arrested in this second case. Khurram was then remanded to the NIA’s custody for 10 days.

  26 April 2023: The National Investigation Agency (NIA) searched Khurram's office in the Dandoosa area of the central Kashmir district.

  5 June 2023: In an opinion adopted on 28 March 2023 and released on 5 June 2023, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) said Khurram's detention was “arbitrary”. It called on the Indian authorities to immediately release him and to provide him with an “enforceable right to compensation and other reparations.”

  13 June 2023: A Delhi Court extended judicial custody of Khurram Parvez for another 45 days after the NIA sought more time to complete the investigation.

  9 August 2023: Communication written by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts to the Indian government was published.

  21 August 2023: Khurram Parvez and Irfan Mehraj's cases were included in the Report of the Secretary-General on reprisals against human rights defenders that had cooperated with United Nations bodies

  16 September 2023: NIA files a charge sheet against Khurram Parvez and Imran Mehraj accusing the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Societies (JKCCS) of allegedly funding terrorism

  ---

  India is rated 'Repressed' by the CIVICUS Monitor.

• India: Chronology of harassment against human rights defender Sudha Bharadwaj

  Sudha Bharadwaj, aged 60, is a human rights lawyer and activist who has spent her life defending Indigenous people in India and protecting workers’ rights. She was detained in August 2018, arrested under the draconian Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) on trumped up accusations of having links with Maoist terrorist organisations, based on evidence believed to befabricated. It is alleged that she and 15 other human rights defenders conspired to incite Dalits at a public meeting which led to violence in Bhima Koregaon village in the Pune district of Maharashtra in January 2018. The treatment of Sudha highlights the increasingly repressive measures used by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government to clamp down on dissent and silence human rights defenders.

• India: Civil society orgs call for the Council's attention on the deteriorating human rights situation

  Statement at the 51st Session of the UN Human Rights Council

  Delivered by Ahmed Adam

  On behalf of Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), World Organisation against Torture (OMCT), CIVICUS – World Alliance for Citizen Participation

  Mr. President,

  We call for the attention of the Council on the deteriorating human rights situation in India.

  Since 2014, India has witnessed a sharp rise of authoritarianism accompanied by systematic erosion of the rule of law and independent institutions such as the National Human Rights Commission, Elections Commission and the judiciary, that are mandated to safeguard human rights and fundamental freedoms.

  Indian authorities have escalated crackdowns on and persecution of human rights defenders, journalists, and critics through restrictive laws and counter-terrorism legislation that do not comply with India’s international obligations. The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) continues to be applied as part of a broader systematic repression of civil society and opposition voices. It fails to comply with international standards and must be repealed or reviewed.

  The government continues its assault on fundamental freedoms, in particular the rights to freedom of expression, media, peaceful assembly, association and movement, in Indian administered Jammu and Kashmir. Kashmiri human rights defender Khurram Parvez, and journalists Fahad Shah remain in detention under the draconian Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) in a deliberate attempt to obfuscate and stifle independent reporting on the extent and gravity of human rights implications of its policies in Kashmir.

  At the same time, majoritarian and ultranationalist narratives actively promoted or endorsed by public and religious officials as well as discriminatory legislation such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and policies, and police inaction, continue to fuel hatred, discrimination, and violence against minorities, especially Muslims.

  We call on Indian authorities to end repression of civil society and media, end harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders, journalists and critics, and release all those who are arbitrarily detained for their legitimate work including human rights defender Khurram Parvez and journalist Fahad Shah.

  The Council must act urgently and appropriately to prevent further escalation of violence, discrimination, and hatred against minorities which, if left unchecked, could lead to gross and systematic violations.

  Thank you

  ---

   Civic space in India is rated as "Repressed" by the CIVICUS Monitor 

• India: Concerns around the judicial harassment against Oxfam India
  Mr. Amit Shah
  Union Minister of Home Affairs of India
  Ministry of Home Affairs
  Government of India

  Dear Excellency,

  We are writing to you to convey our concerns around the harassment of Oxfam India, a non-governmental organisation that has worked for more than 70 years in the country to end discrimination and create a free and just society.

  Oxfam India has been instrumental in assisting communities during the COVID-19 crisis and contributed significantly to building community resilience during the pandemic in 16 states of India. It has provided lifesaving medical and diagnostic equipment to 150 District Hospitals, 172 Primary Health Centres, and 166 Community Health Centres in 16 states.

  Therefore, we are concerned about the recent raid on and investigation of the organisation by India’s Income Tax Department. On 7 to 9 September 2022, officials from the Income Tax (IT) Department conducted what was presented as an income tax ‘survey’ of Oxfam India, during which members of the organisation were not allowed to leave the premises. The staff were also denied access to communication devices and the internet was shut down by the authorities, preventing them from contacting families and relatives. The survey team confiscated private mobile phones belonging to the Senior Leadership Team and the Finance lead and took all of the data from the Oxfam India server.

  We believe that this was the latest attempt to harass and intimidate the staff of the organisation. Hindering Oxfam India’s work will affect thousands of people who already benefit from its services. Further, such raids create a chilling effect on civil society and highlight the broad powers the authorities have.

  This is not the first time Oxfam India has been targeted by the authorities. In January 2022, it was reported that the Central government refused to renew Oxfam India’s Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) licence. Oxfam India was among the 6,000 groups whose FCRA registration was revoked and rejected for renewal on 1 January 2022. The NGO subsequently filed a revision petition which is still pending.

  We are alarmed by the increasing use of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act 2010 - which regulates the acceptance and use of foreign funding for civil society – to target critical civil society organisations. Among other things the law has been used to limit access to funding and impose a heavy burden on bureaucratic procedures under the pretext of combating foreign influence in India.

  As a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), India must respect, protect and fulfil the right to freedom of association as enshrined in Article 22 of the Covenant and should ensure that national security practices must comply with international human rights law and must never be used to stifle the legitimate works of civil society. In 2016, three UN human rights experts urged the government to repeal the FCRA, stating that it was being used to ‘obstruct’ access to foreign funding and fails to comply with international human rights standards.

  Therefore, we urge your government to immediately and unconditionally halt the harassment of Oxfam India and other civil society organisations working to defend human rights. We further reiterate our call to the government of India to review or repeal the FCRA to bring compliance with the ICCPR and to create a safe and enabling environment for civil society organisations to conduct their legitimate work.

  ---

  Signatories:

  1. Alianza ONG, Dominican Republic
  2. Asia Development Alliance
  3. Cemefi- Mexico
  4. Civil Society Capacity Building Center (CESC), Mozambique
  5. CNSC-TOGO
  6. Consortium of Ethiopian Human Rights Organizations (CEHRO)
  7. Cooperation Committee for Cambodia (CCC)
  8. FINESTE. Haiti
  9. Fingo, Finland
  10. Instituto de Comunicacion y Desarrollo (ICD), Uruguay
  11. JOINT - Liga de ONG's em Moçambique
  12. Mozambican Chapter of Media Institute for Southern Africa (MISA Mozambique)
  13. Network of Estonian Non-profit Organizations
  14. NGO Federation of Nepal
  15. Nigeria Network of NGOs
  16. Pakistan Development Alliance
  17. Pakistan NGOs Forum
  18. RACI Argentinas
  19. Red Venezolana de Organizaciones de Sociedad Civil.
  20. REDECIM, Mexico
  21. Redlad.
  22. Regional Initiative Rendir Cuentas
  23. Unión Nacional de Instituciones para el Trabajo de Acción Social (UNITAS) Bolivia
  24. Zambia Council for Social Development (ZCSD)

  ---

   Civic space in India is rated as "Repressed" by the CIVICUS Monitor

• India: Crackdown continues in Jammu & Kashmir

  Joint statement at the 43rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council

  Our organizations express grave concern over the human rights situation in Jammu & Kashmir, where the authorities imposed severe restrictions after a decision to revoke constitutional autonomy on 5 August 2019, including one of the world’s longest internet shutdowns, which the Indian Supreme Court has said violates the right to freedom of expression.

  Hundreds were arbitrarily arrested, and there are some serious allegations of beatings and abusive treatment in custody, including alleged cases of torture. Three former chief ministers, other leading politicians, as well as separatist leaders and their alleged supporters, remain in detention under the Public Safety Act (PSA) and other abusive laws, many without charge and in undisclosed locations outside of Jammu & Kashmir.  This violates fair trial safeguards of the criminal justice system and undermines accountability, transparency, and respect for human rights. Journalists and human rights defenders have been threatened for criticizing the clampdown. These violations, as those committed over the past decades, are met with chronic impunity. 

  We urge the government of India to ensure independent observers including all human rights defenders and foreign journalists are allowed proper access to carry out their work freely and without fear, release everyone detained without charge, and remove restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of movement, including where they have been denied the right to leave the country by being placed on the ‘Exit Control List’.

  We also call on the governments of India and Pakistan to grant unconditional access to OHCHR and other human rights mechanisms to Kashmir.

  We further urge the Council to establish an independent international investigation mechanism into past and ongoing crimes under international law and human rights violations by all parties in Kashmir, as recommended by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

  Amnesty International
  Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
  CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation
  Human Rights Watch
  International Commission of Jurists
  International Federation for Human Rights Leagues (FIDH)
  International Service for Human Rights
  World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)

  This statement is also supported by the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP) and the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS)

  ---

  See our wider advocacy priorities and programme of activities at the 43rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council

• India: Death of priest highlights persecution of human rights defenders under Modi government

  "Human rights activism should not amount to the equivalent of a death sentence,” says CIVICUS, after receiving the devastating news that #Indian activist, Fr. #StanSwamy who had been held in pre-trial detention on trumped up charges had died in hospital.
  🧾https://t.co/hGmmxvknm3 pic.twitter.com/ilwQOSNtnQ

  — CIVICUS (@CIVICUSalliance) July 5, 2021

  The death of Jesuit priest and human rights defender Father Stan Swamy, today, has deeply shocked and outraged global civil society alliance CIVICUS. Swamy’s death is a result of the persecution he has faced by the Modi government after revealing abuses by the state.

• India: Democracy Dialogue Report: 26 August 2018

  Democracy Dialogue held by The Blue Ribbon Movement in Mumbai, India, 26 August 2018

• India: Democracy threatened by growing attacks on civil society 

  According to the policy brief, published by CIVICUS in November 2017, although civil society in India has been playing essential roles ever since the country's struggle for independence, the space for civil society - civic space - is increasingly being contested.

• India: Drop charges and release NewsClick workers and end harassment of media

  

  CIVICUS, a global civil society alliance, calls on the Indian authoritiesto end the crackdown against NewsClick and release its editor and staff held under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). The UAPA, a draconian anti-terror law that has been increasingly used against human rights activists is now being used to target journalists and independent media. 

  On 3 October 2023, Delhi Police conducted simultaneous raids in nearly40 locations including the office of NewsClick and homes of its journalists, staff and contributors including activists. Later, the police arrested and detained the founder and editor of NewsClick Prabir Purkayastha and head of Human Resources Amit Chakraborthy under charges ofterrorism and criminal conspiracy. 

  Today, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)registered a case against NewsClick for alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act - a law that has been used to impose discriminatory restrictions on civil society.

  NewsClick has beentargeted by the Indian authorities since 2021, when the Enforcement Directorate in February 2021 searched their office to investigate an alleged money-laundering probe. Later in September 2021, the Income Tax Department conducted‘surveys’, at the office of NewsClick. 

  In August 2023, the New York Times published aninvestigative article that alleged NewsClick has received funds from a US businessman, and it had “sprinkled its coverage with Chinese government talking points”. Days after this article was published, the Delhi police registered a case based on this article against NewsClick and carried out these raids.

  During the raids, journalists were forced to hand over their laptops and mobile phones without any due process. This action raises concerns because of the reports of  ‘incriminating evidence’ been planted onto UAPA case implicated activists’ devices. After a day long search, the office of NewsClick was sealed by the police. At least46 journalists associated with NewsClick were reportedly questioned with some being asked if they hand covered the protests against discriminatory Citizenship Amendment Act and Farm laws. 

  “This is a complete assault on press freedom in India and an act of reprisal against the critical and independent journalism of NewsClick. Charging a news outlet under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, is a brazen attempt to silence and harass independent media, activists and citizens. We call for the immediate release of Prabir Purkayastha and Amit Chakraborthy. All charges against NewsClick must be dropped,” said David Kode, Advocacy and Campaigns Lead at CIVICUS. 

  The First Information Report (FIR) registered against NewsClick, levels a range ofaccusations  including conspiring “to disrupt the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India” by accepting illegal foreign funds over five years, actively spreading false information to discredit the government, 'causing disaffection against India', providing legal defence for Chinese companies and peddling “paid news” to criticise domestic policies and development project.

  NewsClick hasrefuted all these accusations outrightly and said that it doesn’t publish any news or information “at the behest of any Chinese entity or authority, directly or indirectly”. It says all funding is received legitimately and reported to relevant authorities as per the legal requirements. 

  The CIVICUS Monitor hasdocumented how India’s UAPA law has been used to target activists and stifle dissent. Over the years, it has been invoked against human rights activists as an act of reprisal for their human rights work.  UN experts have raisedconcerns about UAPA’s negative impact on India’s international human rights obligations and called for its review. During India’s Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council in November 2022,several states also raised concerns about the use of UAPA against activists. 

  “This crackdown against independent media is further testimony of the deterioration of civic space in India. The authorities stop misusing repressive laws like the UAPA against activists, civil society and journalists. They must comply with India’s obligations under international human rights laws and standards”, added Kode.

  ---

   Civic space in India is rated as "repressed" by the CIVICUS Monitor

• India: End communication blockade in Jammu and Kashmir without further delay

  

  Kathmandu/Bangkok/Paris/Geneva, 4 October 2019:

  Today completes two months of the unprecedented communication blockade in Jammu and Kashmir, India. The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), CIVICUS, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) urge the government of India to immediately restore internet and mobile phone connections in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. We are deeply concerned over the wide-ranging impact on the enjoyment of basic human rights caused by this continuous restriction on communications.

  Internet shutdowns, of which there have been dozens in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir since the beginning of the year, have significant consequences, negatively impacting the economy, education, access to health care and emergency services, press freedom, freedom of expression, and the right to engage in political decision making. This is particularly grave given the context, in which the government of India, on 5 August, 2019, revoked the autonomous status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir and bifurcated the State into two Union Territories. With the suspension of communications, people have effectively been denied the right to make informed political opinions and to express themselves regarding these decisions.

  Although limited landline connections were reportedly restored across Jammu and Kashmir on 13 September 2019, access to those connections remains limited. No enforceable law in India permits such unprecedented and prolonged internet shutdown without any valid justification. Moreover, freedom of expression is protected under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a state party, and under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.

  A petition filed before the Supreme Court of India noted that the communication shutdown had fueled “anxiety, panic, alarm, insecurity and fear among the residents of Kashmir” and created hurdles for journalists to report on the situation in the region. In a statement on 22 August 2019, five UN human rights experts expressed deep concern over the shutdown and called it “inconsistent with the fundamental norms of necessity and proportionality.’

  There have also been reports of hundreds of detentions of political activists, human rights defenders, community leaders, and others, including children between 9 and 11 years of age, under the draconian Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA) of 1978, which permits preventive detention without charge. The communication blockade has also impeded access to legal aid.

  FORUM-ASIA, CIVICUS, FIDH, and OMCT strongly believe that this prolonged restriction on communication, coupled with arbitrary mass detentions, denial of freedom of expression and access to information, is unnecessary and disproportionate to the situation and will further lead to a deterioration of human rights and basic freedoms. We urge the government of India to end the communications blockade immediately and to adopt remedial measures to undo the damage done so far in Jammu and Kashmir. We reiterate our call to the government of India to resort to peaceful democratic means and refrain from use of brute force.

  For more information, please contact:

  1. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, majumdar[AT]civicus.org
  2. South Asia Programme, FORUM-ASIA, sasia[AT]forum-asia.org
  3. FIDH, jrousselot[AT]fidh.org
  4. OMCT, nb[AT]omct.org, sa[AT]omct.org
• India: End reprisals against the Jammu & Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) & human rights defenders in Kashmir

  Sixteen human rights organisations today called on the Indian authorities to immediately stop the reprisals against human rights defenders and organisations in Jammu and Kashmir, especially Khurram Parvez, Irfan Mehraj, and the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS). Khurram Parvez[1] has been arbitrarily detained since 22 November 2021 as a reprisal for his human rights work, including documentation and advocacy in Jammu and Kashmir. We are alarmed by new criminal cases filed against Khurram Parvez and Irfan Mehraj, a journalist and human rights defender, in March 2023, and the ongoing reprisals against JKCCS.

  JKCCS is the leading human rights organisation in Jammu and Kashmir. Since the organisation was founded in 2000, it has conducted ground-breaking human rights investigations, published dozens of rigorously researched human rights reports, litigated human rights cases, and through non-violent mobilisation and advocacy given voice to otherwise unheard victims of human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir. The organisation’s research is widely considered to be authoritative by scholars, international civil society and the United Nations’ human rights experts, who have cited JKCCS’ work in their own reports on the human rights situation in Jammu and Kashmir. Our organisations have also cited and referenced JKCCS’ work, which is invaluable in understanding the human rights situation of Jammu and Kashmir and is of exceptional quality.

  Khurram Parvez is the Program Coordinator of JKCCS and the Chairperson of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD). In February 2023, Khurram Parvez was the recipient of the prestigious Martin Ennals Award. Irfan Mehraj previously worked as a researcher for JKCCS. In October 2020, the JKCCS office and Khurram Parvez’s home were raided by India’s National Investigation Agency (NIA), and devices and documents including his passport were seized. Indian authorities through targeted reprisals and criminalizing human rights work have made it impossible for JKCCS to continue its vital work. The charges brought by the NIA against Khurram Parvez include serious terrorism-related charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA),[2] a counter-terror law that violates international norms and is systematically used by Indian authorities to incapacitate and persecute human rights defenders and other dissenters.[3] The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, together with the Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism and many others, have previously raised grave concerns about the 2019 amendment to the UAPA because of the threat it poses to human rights defenders and the right to freedom of expression.[4]

  In addition to the charges against Khurram under the UAPA, another case has been filed by the NIA in October 2020 which specifically targets JKCCS and anyone associated with the organisation. On 20 March 2023, the NIA arrested Irfan Mehraj forserious terrorism-related charges. Khurram Parvez, already imprisoned in the 2021 case, was also arrested in the JKCCS case.The NIA has publicly statedthat one of the grounds for Irfan Mehraj’s arrest was his close association with Khurram Parvez and JKCCS who were ‘funding terror activities in the valley and propagating secessionist agenda in the Valley under the garb of protection of human rights.’[5] Both human rights defenders remain detained in the maximum-security Rohini Jail in New Delhi. Khurram Parvez has been denied both release and bail despite widespread calls for his release.

  Rather than upholding international legal obligations and protecting human rights, Indian authorities have explicitly criminalised JKCCS’ critical human rights work describing it as an organisation that publishes ‘anti-national and incriminating material to bring hatred, contempt and disaffection towards the Government of India’.[6] The Indian authorities have also carried out multiple raids at the residence and office of Khurram Parvez. His and Irfan Mehraj’s arrest highlights the determination of Indian authorities to criminalise and delegitimise human rights defenders and incapacitate and punish those like Khurram Parvez and Irfan Mehraj who, in extremely difficult circumstances and at great personal cost, defend human rights. On 24 March 2023, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Mary Lawlor, expressed her concern over the targeting of JKCCS and stated that the organisation ‘carries out essential work monitoring human rights. Their research and analysis of human rights violations are of huge value, including to international organisations seeking to ensure accountability and non-repetition of abuses.’[7]

  There is a credible risk of increasing threats against JKCCS. In early March 2023, a week before Irfan Mehraj was arrested, the NIA interrogated Khurram Parvez for two consecutive days inside Rohini Jail, and threatened him and his colleagues with arrest in a new case. In their submissions to the Patiala House Court on 22 March when Khurram Parvez and Irfan Mehraj were remanded, the NIA indicated that more persons are likely to be arrested in the same case.[8]

  We call on the Indian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release Khurram Parvez and Irfan Mehraj, drop all charges against them and to end the ongoing persecution and targeting of human rights defenders in Jammu and Kashmir. Reprisals against human rights defenders in Jammu and Kashmir including human rights organisations and independent journalists are aimed at maintaining a forcible silence and facilitating continued impunity for violations in an intensely militarised region that the Indian government has made inaccessible to the international community and where grave human rights violations are longstanding and ongoing. The continued arbitrary detention of Khurram Parvez and Irfan Mehraj, and the abuse of counter-terror and related laws to target human rights defenders is a violation of India’s international obligations and reinforces concerns about the deteriorating human rights situation in India. India should protect human rights, not persecute human rights defenders. Indian authorities must immediately comply with their international legal obligations, allow civil society to freely operate in Jammu and Kashmir and India, and cease their longstanding obstruction of international civil society and inter-governmental organisations including the United Nations Special Rapporteurs and other human rights mechanisms which should have unfettered access to Jammu and Kashmir and Kashmiri detainees.

  Signed

  • Amnesty International
  • Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
  • Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD)
  • Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
  • CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
  • Collectif des familles de disparus en Algerie (CFDA)
  • Fédération Euro-méditerranéenne contre les disparitions forces (FEMED)
  • Front Line Defenders (FLD)
  • Latin American Federation of Associations for Relatives of the Detained-Disappeared (FEDEFAM)
  • FIDH (International Federation for Human Rights) within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
  • International Coalition Against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED)
  • International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
  • Kashmir Law and Justice Project
  • Martin Ennals Foundation
  • Nonviolence International
  • World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) - within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

  ---

  [1]     _{Parvez was recently recognized with the 2023 Martin Ennals award for human rights defenders in recognition of his decades-long efforts to document and seek accountability for human rights abuses despite grave personal risk.}

  _{[2]     See FIDH & OMCT, Prominent rights defender Khurram Parvez is still in prison(Urgent Appeal), 17 May 2022, https://www.fidh.org/en/issues/human-rights-defenders/india-prominent-rights-defender-khurram-parvez-is-still-in-prison.}

  _{[3]     See FIDH, FLD & OMCT, Joint submission for the Universal Periodic Review,31 March 2022, https://www.fidh.org/en/region/asia/india/india-joint-submission-for-the-universal-periodic-review-upr.}

  _{[4]     See Mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism et al, OL IND 7/2020, 6 May 2020, https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=25219}

  _{[5]     See, Twitter, NIA India, NIA makes first arrest in NGO Terror Funding Case, 21 March 2023, https://twitter.com/NIA_India/status/1638104562879037442?s=20.}

  _{[6]     See, NIA, Money transfer to J&K by NGOs through Hawala Channel for terrorist activities in Kashmir valley, Case RC-37/2020/NIA/DLI, 08 October 2020, https://www.nia.gov.in/case-detail.htm?363.}

  _{[7]     See, OHCHR, Press Release, India: UN expert demands immediate end to crackdown on Kashmiri human rights defenders, 24 March 2023, https://srdefenders.org/india-un-expert-demands-immediate-end-to-crackdown-on-kashmiri-human-rights-defenders-press-release/}

  _{[8]     See, National Investigation Agency (NIA), NIA chargesheets another overground worker in J&K terrorism conspiracy case, 21 March 2023, https://www.nia.gov.in/writereaddata/Portal/PressReleaseNew/1422_1_Pr2.pdf}

• India: Government must halt its harassment of human rights activist Harsh Mander

  CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance, condemns the recent raid carried out on facilities associated with human rights defender Harsh Mander who serves as Director of the Centre for Equity Studies and calls on the government of India to stop targeting and intimidating human rights defenders. The raid adds to the long list of restrictions imposed on human rights defenders in the country. 

  On 16 September 2021, the Enforcement Directorate under the Ministry of Finance of India conducted the raid on Harsh Mander’s residence, the Centre for Equity Studies’ office, and a children’s home run by the organisation under the pretext of investigating money laundering allegations against him. The raid happened several hours after Harsh Mander departed to Germany to attend a fellowship programme.

  Harsh Mander is a prominent human rights defender and social activist who has been critical of the Narendra Modi government. He has raised concerns about how the government  handled the COVID-19 pandemic, the increasing attacks on press freedom, and the discriminatory citizenship law passed in 2019 which human rights groups have called ‘unconstitutional and divisive’.

  Following the raid, more than 500 activists in India issued a joint statement in solidarity with Harsh Mander and condemned the intimidation tactics.

  “The authorities must halt its harassment of human rights activist Harsh Mander. These actions conducted by the Enforcement Directorate is a clear tactic to intimidate and criminalise the defender. It also creates a chilling effect on government critics and is a strategy to force many to self-censorship.”, said Josef Benedict, CIVICUS Civic Space Researcher for the Asia Pacific.

  Similar raids were conducted by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights in October 2020 on two children’s homes associated with him based on accusations of financial irregularities and illicit activities.

  These raids highlight an ongoing pattern of baseless and politically-motivated criminal charges brought by the authorities against activists across India that has been documented by the CIVICUS Monitor.  This includes the use of a variety of restrictive laws - including national security and counter-terrorism legislation - to imprison human rights defenders, peaceful protesters and critics.  Some have been in pre-trial detention for years.

  “It is appalling that activists in India are facing harassment just for speaking up for human rights. The government must drop all charges against them and immediately and unconditionally release all those detained. It must also take steps to ensure that human rights defenders are able to carry out their legitimate activities without any hindrance or fear of reprisals,” added Benedict.

  India’s rating was downgraded by the CIVICUS Monitor from ‘obstructed’ to ‘repressed’ in December 2019. 

• India: Halt harassment and release human rights defender Teesta Setalvad

  

  CIVICUS, the global civil society alliance, condemns the recent arrest of Teesta Setalvad and calls on the government of India to stop targeting human rights defenders. The arrest is the latest attempt by the Modi government to criminalise activists and undermine civic space in the country.