21 May in recent history
Recently Pathribal was in news when the Supreme Court asked the
Army authorities to decide whether its personnel accused of fake encounter
killings in Jammu and Kashmir and Assam should be tried by court-martial
proceedings or by regular criminal courts. A bench of Justice B S.Chauhan
and Justice Swatanter Kumar said that if the Army authorities were not keen on
court-martial proceedings, then the CBI can seek sanction from the Centre for
prosecution of the Army officers. http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=761234.
Some human right groups had seen it as a set back. Yet it is not so.
“By asking the Army to take a
decision on whether it intends to court martial the accused, the Supreme Court
has cut through the careful posturing of the Ministry of Defence on the matter.
It bears noting that at no stage did the Ministry seek to discharge its own
obligation to ensure justice under the Army Act in the face of the cold-blooded
killing of five innocent civilians by senior officers. That obligation can no
longer be shrugged aside. The CBI has been directed to seek sanction to
prosecute from the government if the court martial option is not exercised
within eight weeks, and a decision on that request has to be taken within three
months. For the families of the victims, there is finally light at the end of
the tunnel. For their sake, and the sake of Indian democracy, Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh must do the right thing and ensure that the prosecution gets to
have its day in court.” http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/article3374520.ece
There is a lesson here to be imbibed by those interested in bringing
justice to victims of Gujarat massacre 2002. AC report cuts through careful
posturing of various actors. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3393808.ece There is no need to feel despondent. Raju
Ramachandran is an advocate and has chosen his words well. As far as Haren
Pandya angle is concerned, the audio tape of his deposition before the Citizens’
Tribunal exists and in safe custody and
will make appearance at appropriate time. AC could not have commented on this,
because the SIT chose not to take cognizance of the tape.
No comments:
Post a Comment