Security forces are using arbitrary and excessive force in response to protests in Jammu and Kashmir, violating international standards and worsening the human rights crisis in the state.

At least 78 people, including two security force personnel, have been killed in the state since 8 July, following protests and violent clashes after the killing of a member of the Hizbul Mujahideen armed group. Some demonstrators have thrown stones and attacked police stations, government buildings and politicians’ homes. Security force personnel have fired live ammunition, tear gas and pellets from pump action shotguns.

“Pellet-firing shotguns have injured and blinded peaceful protestors and bystanders,” said Aakar Patel, Executive Director at Amnesty International India. “Children have been hit by pellets from these shotguns while sitting inside their homes.”

“Children have been hit by pellets from these shotguns while sitting inside their homes.”

“These weapons are inherently indiscriminate and always carry the risk of causing serious injury to people who are not engaging in violence. There is simply no proper way to use these weapons, and they should be prohibited.”

On 10 September, a man was killed after being fired at by a pellet-firing shotgun in Anantnag district. Another man in Shopian district died after he was hit on the head by a tear gas shell.

“There is simply no proper way to use these weapons, and they should be prohibited.”

At least six people have been killed and hundreds blinded or otherwise injured by pellet-firing shotguns. According to media reports, on 2 September, India’s Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) approved the use of PAVA (Pelargonic Acid Vanillyl Amide) shells, a chilli-based munition, as an alternative to pellet-firing shotguns, which were to be used only in ‘rare’ cases. However there have been over 100 reported cases of pellet injuries in the first week of September at hospitals in Srinagar.

At least six people have been killed and hundreds blinded or otherwise injured by pellet-firing shotguns.

The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms state that firearms should not be used “except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury” and “only when less extreme means are insufficient”. The UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials states that law enforcement officials may use force “only when strictly necessary and to the extent required for the performance of their duty”.

The MHA approved the use of PAVA shells on the recommendation of a committee formed to suggest alternatives to pellet-firing shotguns. PAVA shells are a form of chemical irritant weapon, which are designed to temporarily deter or disable individuals by producing temporary sensory irritation of the eyes and upper respiratory tract. They are commonly delivered through hand-held sprays, hand-thrown grenades or from weapon launched projectiles. Neither pellet-firing shotguns nor PAVA shells have been used to police protests anywhere else in India.

“Chemical irritants have the potential to be used in an arbitrary or indiscriminate manner,” said Aakar Patel. “Before being deployed, these weapons should go through a rigorous safety, testing and approvals process. Security forces must be trained to use them correctly to reduce the risk of unnecessary injury, and they must be accompanied by clear instructions and warnings on their use, effects, risks, and the necessary precautions to be taken.”

“Chemical irritants have the potential to be used in an arbitrary or indiscriminate manner.”

“The concentration of chemical irritants should be as low as possible to ensure that they do not cause unnecessary harm, and to restrict the impact to the persons targeted. Their use must be carefully measured, targeted and controlled, and take into account factors such as the proximity of schools or hospitals.”

The Resident Doctors Association of the Shri Maharaja Hari Singh Hospital – the largest government hospital in Srinagar – and associated hospitals have expressed concern at the proposed use of PAVA shells, which they say can cause a range of eye, lung and skin injuries.

The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms state: “The development and deployment of non-lethal incapacitating weapons should be carefully evaluated in order to minimize the risk of endangering uninvolved persons, and the use of such weapons should be carefully controlled.”

“The continued abusive use of pellet-firing shotguns, along with the deployment of the PAVA shells, is extremely worrying,” said Aakar Patel.

“Law enforcement officials in Jammu and Kashmir must only use force as a last resort after non-violent means have been ineffective, and ensure that any force used is both necessary and proportional. Anyone suspected of using arbitrary or abusive force should be prosecuted.

“The central and state governments need to abandon their heavy-handed tactics in Kashmir.”

“The central and state governments need to abandon their heavy-handed tactics in Kashmir.”

More information

Any new weapons or ammunition intended for use in law enforcement should be considered only if they meet operational needs which cannot be met in any other way. If they are assessed as being needed, they must be rigorously tested on their efficacy, including their accuracy, precision and reliability, and the degree of possible harm and other effects they may cause.

There must be evidence that the use of the weapons complies with international human rights standards, particularly in meeting the principle of proportionality, the prevention of risks for third persons, and the prevention of misuse. Testing should be carried out by an independent body, and the results made public.

Security force personnel must receive adequate training and certification as a precondition before being allowed to use new weapons during law enforcement. The training should also sensitize them on the underlying principles on the use of force.

The use of new weapons must also be subject to thorough reporting, supervision and control mechanisms in order to continually evaluate their effectiveness, effects and risks.

With multiple bills put forward this week in Parliament to legislate for marriage equality in Australia, now is the time for a free vote on the issue.

“If a free vote were held today, Parliament would legalise same-sex marriage,” said Steph Cousins, Government Relations Manager with Amnesty International.

“If a free vote were held today, Parliament would legalise same-sex marriage.”

“That’s because the overwhelming majority of Parliament supports marriage equality – and so do the constituents they represent.”

“We have laws against racial discrimination, sex discrimination in the workplace and discrimination against people with different abilities. It’s high time Australia legislated to end marriage discrimination,” Steph Cousins said.

“Important matters of human rights and equality should not be determined by a popularity contest. To put issues of fundamental human rights to a popular vote suggests they are conditional.”

“Important matters of human rights and equality should not be determined by a popularity contest. To put issues of fundamental human rights to a popular vote suggests they are conditional.”

Amnesty International is urging all members of the Turnbull Government who support marriage equality to show genuine leadership during party room discussions on the Government’s proposed plebiscite bill on Tuesday.

“We don’t need a plebiscite. We need leadership,” Steph Cousins said.

“We don’t need a plebiscite. We need leadership.”

“If our leaders fail to legislate for marriage equality and resort to a plebiscite, at the very least that bill must be self-executing, and the government should not fund the campaign.”

 

“Fiji must immediately and unconditionally release the five men detained today for holding a meeting to discuss Fiji’s Constitution on Constitution Day. This is a brazen crackdown on people for peacefully exercising their right to freedom of expression,” said Rafendi Djamin, Amnesty International’s Director for South East Asia and the Pacific.

“The men appear to have been detained under Fiji’s repressive Public Order Amendment Decree which restricts the ability to hold ‘public’ meetings. There is no evidence to suggest that the event posed any threat to national security. Fijians should be free to openly discuss their supreme law and even criticize without fear of reprisals.”

“Fijians should be free to openly discuss their supreme law and even criticize without fear of reprisals.”

Background

Five men have been detained by the police on Saturday 10 September 2016 after holding a discussion about the 2013 Constitution on Fiji’s inaugural Constitution Day, a public holiday, on 6 September 2016.

The detained men are:

• Attar Singh, a prominent trade unionist;
• Sitiveni Rabuka, leader of SODELPA political party;
• Biman Prasad, leader of the NFP political party;
• Tupeni Baba, member of SODELPA; and
• Jone Dakuvula from civil society organisation Dialogue Fiji.

The office of the NFP political party has been raided by police, with documents and computers confiscated.

Police claim the panel discussion was held without a permit. The Public Order Amendment Decree requires that permits be obtained for ‘public discussions’. The law does not apply to private meetings. This comes after a Fiji Sugar Industry meeting was cancelled on Tuesday for not having a permit.

Amnesty International has previously criticised the 2013 Constitution for failing falling short on human rights protection and for its wide reaching immunities, which cover any government act between 2006 and 2014.

Reacting to the conviction earlier today of Kem Sokha, the acting head of the opposition Cambodian National Rescue Party, on charges under Article 538 of refusing to appear as a witness, Amnesty International said:

“Cambodia is in crisis with the government engaging in a campaign of intimidation against peaceful political and civil society activists, using frivolous prosecutions designed to punish, isolate and marginalise any peaceful dissent,” said Josef Benedict, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for South East Asia and the Pacific.

“Today’s conviction of acting opposition leader Kem Sokha for refusing to appear as a witness is yet another transparent act of political intimidation and the latest development in the ongoing campaign. The government appears to believe that violating human rights is a legitimate tool of government, as is compromising the independence of the country’s judiciary and the government’s standing in the international community.”

“The government appears to believe that violating human rights is a legitimate tool of government, as is compromising the independence of the country’s judiciary and the government’s standing in the international community.”

Amnesty International calls on the Cambodian government to immediately end its campaign of intimidation, to respect the rights of all civil society and political activists, and to ensure the independence of the judiciary.

 

The nation’s leading humanitarian and human rights organisations are calling on the Australian Government to resettle the promised 12,000 refugees from Syria and Iraq by the first quarter of 2017.

It’s a year today since the Government made the pledge to grant an additional 12,000 Syrians and Iraqis a permanent visa in response to an outpouring of public support following the photos of three-year-old Alan Kurdi washed up dead on a Turkish beach.

World Vision Australia Chief Executive Tim Costello said it was incomprehensible that Australia had been able to resettle only a fraction of the special intake of 12,000 Syrian and Iraqi refugees in the last year.

“When Tony Abbott promised to take 12,000 more refugees, he said it would reflect ‘Australia’s proud history as a country with a generous heart’,” Mr Costello said. “But there is a point at which a promise begins to look hollow when it is not honoured and Australia has reached that point.”

“When Tony Abbott promised to take 12,000 more refugees, he said it would reflect ‘Australia’s proud history as a country with a generous heart’.”

Save the Children Chief Executive Paul Ronalds said a year ago the Australian Government opened its arms to the displaced people of Syria and Iraq with an offer of refuge and protection, but it hadn’t finished the job.

“Australians deserve transparent information about how many refugees have reached safety on our shores, and what the timeline is to settle all 12,000 people. Australians need to be assured that we’re doing what we said we would – urgently providing a place of welcome and safety for those who so desperately need it.”

“Australians deserve transparent information about how many refugees have reached safety on our shores, and what the timeline is to settle all 12,000 people.”

Oxfam Australia’s Chief Executive Helen Szoke said Australia’s efforts are lagging well behind other wealthy nations.

“Canada completed security checks and settled 25,000 people in just four months. We know millions of ordinary men, women and children have been forced to flee their homes in a desperate search for protection and are in dire need of assistance. We urgently need to help as many as we can.”

“Canada completed security checks and settled 25,000 people in just four months.”

Plan International Australia Chief Executive Officer Ian Wishart added: “We’re in the midst of the largest refugee crisis in living memory. In Syria, half the pre-conflict population of 22 million Syrians have fled their homes in the past five years and more than 13.5 million people are in need of help. Australia needs to shoulder its fair share of the global responsibility for refugees. The children of Syria have suffered enough.”

CARE Australia’s acting-Chief Executive Louise Gray said: “The Australian Government made a commitment and must stick to it. This is a global humanitarian crisis and it demands a global response. People’s lives depend on it.”

“This is a global humanitarian crisis and it demands a global response. People’s lives depend on it.”

Amnesty International Australia’s National Director Claire Mallinson said: “As the situation in Syria continues to deteriorate, Australia must get on with fulfilling the promise we made to provide people with a safe place to settle. Every day that Minister Dutton fails to meet his commitment to settle the 12,000 people from Syria and Iraq is another day they spend without hope of a peaceful and safe life.”