SC asks Central Govt to respond to recommendations of Special Rapporteur on fake encounters
Source: Hueiyen News Service
Imphal, November 26 2015:
The hearing of the Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) case was held at Court Number 9 of the Supreme Court of India with Justice Lokur and Justice U Lalit, constituting the Social Justice bench of the apex court.
Sources said that the Attorney General Mukul Rohtagi addressed the court on behalf of the Union of India and presented a convincing argument addressing the alleged extra-judicial executions by the armed forces of the Union under the Court of Inquiry under the Army Act.
However the amicus curie and Senior Advocate of the petitioners, Colin Gonsalves, vehemently contested this.
The Bench asked the Union of India what progress has been made on the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur on Extra Judicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions, on his visit in 2012 and over the report he submitted to the UN Human Rights Council in 2013 and the subsequent follow up report in 2015 .
Later the Court grilled the counsel of Manipur, Senior Advocate Giri on why no FIRs had been filed against the State in any of the listed cases.
They also asked for explanations as to why the NHRC guidelines and provisions of the CrPC were not being followed.
The Court also highlighted that the inquiries conducted by the Executive Magistrate were not sufficient, as the FIRs in question had been filed against the victims not against the security forces and police commandos, and because no one from both sides had attended many of these inquiries.
In any case, the executive magistrate would not have been competent to declare whether an offence had taken place or not.
The Court expressed concern on how an institution that had not even followed the guidelines could possibly conduct an independent and effective investigation into the cases in the petition.
The Court will continue to hear arguments on December 3. The Court has also asked the amicus curiae to make a submission on technically issues regarding jurisdiction under the Army Act.