In this report, the Human Rights Watch Arms Project focuses on the human rights impact of the diffusion of sophisticated light weapons and small arms to Sikh and Kashmiri insurgents, commonly referred to as militants. It details violations of the laws of war committed by militants, and traces the sources of the weapons used by the militants in those abuses. The report also discusses abuses by Indian forces and weapons supplies to the Indian government. It concludes with a series of recommendations to the Sikh and Kashmiri militants, the Indian government, and the countries that directly or indirectly have supplied them with weapons, particularly Pakistan and the United States.

Topics: sources of weapons for militants in Punjab and Kashmir, arms and abuses in Punjab, arms and abuses in Kashmir, arming the Indian government, conclusions and recommendations

Terms: violation of international human rights law, violation of international humanitarian law, arms pipeline, abuse of arms, abuse of arms by militants, abuse of arms by Indian army

This is a report by Human Rights Watch which reports that India’s abuses in Kashmir rose even though international pressure from trade and security partners on India eased. It  documents dozens of cases of extrajudicial executions committed by Indian paramilitary and military forces between December 1993 and June 1994. It found that Indian troops continue to summarily execute detainees, kill civilians in reprisal attacks and burn down neighborhoods and villages as collective punishment for those suspected of supporting the militants.Torture also continues to be routine. Human rights groups have compiled a list of over fifty interrogation centers where detainees are kept in unacknowledged detention and tortured. The security forces routinely defy court orders to produce the detainees, and several thousand habeas corpus petitions filed in these cases remain pending without result, according to the Jammu and Kashmir Bar Association. All of these actions are in clear violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which India is a party. Although the government claims to have punished security personnel for abuses, to Human Rights Watch/Asia’s knowledge not a single soldier has been prosecuted for the murder or torture of a detainee.

Topics: disappearances, extrajudicial executions in Bandipora and Mawar, arson in Mawar, torture, failure to prosecute, U.S. policy, conclusions and recommendations

Terms: extrajudicial killings in Bandipora, extrajudicial killings in Mawar, arson in Mawar, custodial killings, reprisal killings, custodial torture, excessive use of force, state impunity, violation of habeas corpus

Article Summary: This is a report by the UN special rapporteur on religious discrimination (Abdelfattah Amor) that was submitted to the UN Commission on Human Rights. Disclaimer: This report (by a UN rapporteur) repeats and amplifies certaoin Indian state propaganda on Kashmir.  It uses terminology and analysis deployed by Indian disinformation efforts which are inconsistent with factual reality and, among other things, serve to obscure actual violations and promote impunity for those violations.

Topics: persecution of Hindus, Muslim extremism, Indian state propaganda, disinformation, organized lying

Terms: 1993 Hazratbal siege

‍

This is a report by the UN special rapporteur on torture (Nigel S. Rodley) that was submitted to the UN Commission on Human Rights.

Topics: torture by Indian forces, impunity, violation of habeus corpus, excessive use of force

Terms: rape as torture, torture by Border Security Force (BSF), torture by Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), denial of justice, rape in Chak Saidapora, rape in Haran, rape in Gurihakhar, October 1991 custodial torture and killing of Muzaffar Ahmed Mirza, January 1993 custodial torture of Manzoor Ahmed Ganai, 1993 rape of Nazeera Jan, April 1993 custodial torture of Masroof Sultan

In December 1992, Amnesty International reported the alleged rape of nine women in Shopian, Jammu and Kashmir, on the night of 10/11 October 1992. It urged that an independent and impartial inquiry be carried out into the allegations. The Indian authorities responded by saying that the result of two investigations into these allegations, one of them carried out by the army, the other by a Senior Superintendent of Police, was that "these allegations were trumped up at the instance of the militant outfit to malign the reputation of the security forces". Amnesty International notes that there is strong prima facie evidence of rape and torture and no independent investigation into the allegations.

‍Topics: sexual violence, state failure to bring rape victims to justice

Terms: 1992 allegations of rape in Shopian, custodial rape, rape by armed forces, gender-based violence, sexual violence, right to impartial and independent inquiry, failure to investigate, failure of accountability, state disinformation