The Hindu : National : U.S. team in Gujarat to study `rights violations'

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Jan 23, 2005

National

National

U.S. team in Gujarat to study `rights violations'

By Manas Dasgupta

AHMEDABAD, JAN. 22. A five-member delegation of the Bar Association of New York City is on a visit to Gujarat to study possible human rights violations, particularly in context of those detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA).

The delegation comprises Justice Jed Rakoff, federal district court judge for the southern district of New York, Gerald P. Convoy, Deputy Commissioner in the office of the Commissioner of Investigation for the New York City School district, Mamta Kaushal and Anil Kalhan, non-resident Indians practising law, and another advocate Sam Scott Miller.

They met some prominent city-based lawyers and also spoke to the family members of those detained under the POTA. They are on a mission to study the `human rights violations' in various countries and underline the need for remedial measures.

The meeting was arranged by the Aman Samuday and the Jan Sangharsha Manch, fighting the cases of the communal riot victims before the G.T. Nanavati and K.G. Shah judicial inquiry commission probing the Godhra train carnage and the communal riots that followed.

The team issaid to be up in arms against the similar Patriot Act, enacted in the U.S. after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack.

Some family members told the delegation that though POTA had been repealed by the United Progressive Alliance Government, those detained before it was scrapped had not benefited.

According to the Manch convenor, Mukul Sinha, repeated appeals to the UPA Government to repeal the Act with retrospective effect had fallen on deaf ears.

The Manch and other human rights activists in the country had now requested the Centre to at least drop Section 32 of the POTA under which the "so-called" confessional statements made before the police were treated as conclusive evidence.

Mr. Sinha said that neither the new Anti-Terrorist Act nor the country's Criminal Procedure Code treat the statements before the police as evidence since it was possible for the police to "extract confessions" under duress and physical torture.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National