The Army’s decision to initiate court martial proceedings against six Army personnel including two officers involved in killing three civilians in a staged encounter on the line of Control in April 2010 has evoked mixed response.
While the mainstream political leaders hail the decision as “Army’s resolve for zero tolerance to human rights abuses”, the separatist leaders have demanded holding the trail in International War Tribunal or in a civil court. The human rights group - Association of parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP), however, described the announcement as “army’s obfuscation campaign in Jammu and Kashmir”.
The army on Wednesday said that it has decided to hold Court Martial proceedings against a colonel, a major and four soldiers for staging an encounter in Macchil sector of north Kashmir. Three men hailing from a village in Baramulla district had been killed in the fake encounter and passed off as foreign infiltrators. The killings were aimed at earning accolades and ranks.
Police investigations and subsequent Court of Inquiry by the army established shady conduct in the encounter. The Machhil encounter triggered off a massive public uprising in Kashmir in 2010 summer, which led to killing of more than a hundred protestors and bystanders at the hands of police and security forces. “Army deserves kudos for this action (Court Martial) which will go a long way to further strengthen discipline in the Army”, said JKPCC President Prof Saifuddin Soz.
The separatist leaders Syed Ali Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq rejected the Court Martial proceedings saying these courts cannot be expected to deliver justice. “The Court Martial by the army lacks credibility. Therefore the armymen involved in the staged encounter should be tried in civil court”, said Mirwaiz Umar farooq, Chairman of a faction of Hurriyat Conference.
Another separatist leader Syed Ali Geelani demanded trail of the accused armymen in International War Tribunal. The rights groups also cry hoarse on the army’s decision. “How can the same army be trusted to prosecute its personnel for the human rights abuse that has institutional mechanisms of impunity and has incentivized policy of encouraging the extra-judicial killingsIJ” asked Tahira Begum, spokesperson of APDP.
“Court Martials are exactly like Kangaroo courts where the victim has no rights, no access and absolute lack of transparency, while as the accused has all the protection, access and also the scope to challenge the wrongs of the judgment in the higher courts. The civilian victims cannot avail the opportunity of having being represented by a lawyer in a Court Martial and neither do they have the right to challenge the court martial judgments in higher courts”, she said.