Click here to read or download the report prepared by Justice A.P. Shah, former Chief Justice of Madras and Delhi High Court, Geeta Ramaseshan, Advocate, Madras High Court and Prof. Prabha Kalvimani, Irular Tribes Protection Association on alleged State Suppression of Democratic Rights in Kudankulam during the anti-nuclear struggle against nuclear power and commissioning of Kundankulam Nuclear Power Plant.
FINDINGS OF THE HEARING
The restriction on freedom of movement
Registration of criminal cases and arrests
4. THE SYSTEMATIC REGISTRATION OF VARIOUS CASES AGAINST THE PROTESTORS CHARGING THEM WITH SEDITION, WAGING WAR AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, PROMOTING ENMITY BETWEEN DIFFERENT GROUPS, AND OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, SEEMS TO SUPPORT THE ALLEGATION OF TH E PERSONS WHO APPEAR ED BEFORE THE COMMIT TEE THAT CASES HAVE BEEN FOISTED ON THEM IN VIEW OF THEIR ACTIVE PARTICIPATION AGAINST THE NUCLEAR PLANT. THE JURY FOUND THAT MANY ARRESTS WERE MADE VERY ARBITRARILY. THE MECHANICAL AND ARBITRARY3
METHOD OF ARRESTS INDICATE THAT THE ISSUE WAS NOT THAT THE PERSONS CONCERNED HAD COMMITTED AN OFFENCE BUT WAS MORE TO PREVENT A NY KIND OF LEGITIMATE PROTEST OR DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AGAINST THE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT.
"METHOD OF ARRESTS INDICATE THAT THE ISSUE WAS NOT THAT THE PERSONS CONCERNED HAD COMMITTED AN OFFENCE BUT WAS MORE TO PREVENT ANY KIND OF LEGITIMATE PROTEST OR DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AGAINST THE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT."
FINDINGS OF THE HEARING
The restriction ON FREEDOM of speech
1. People living aro und the nuclear plant have strong reservations to its presence and have voiced their opposition to it. However ever since the plant was commissioned, any activities critical of the plant were countered by strong reaction as if even talking about the subjec t was seditious and against the State. This resulted in the suppression of the people's right to freedom of speech.
The restriction on freedom of movement
2. The area around where the plant is situated was under siege with the imposition of section 144 CrPC at the time of the hearing, and in March. In both instances, the Government placed complete and severe restrictions on the freedom of movement of persons living in and around the area.
The denial of information
3. The protestors are seeking genuine information that would address their concerns about safety, and there are genuine reasons for such safety concerns. Instead of addressing their concerns, and furnishing them information to which they are entitled under the Right to Information Act, the state police machinery is being used to harass them.
Registration of criminal cases and arrests
4. THE SYSTEMATIC REGISTRATION OF VARIOUS CASES AGAINST THE PROTESTORS CHARGING THEM WITH SEDITION, WAGING WAR AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, PROMOTING ENMITY BETWEEN DIFFERENT GROUPS, AND OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, SEEMS TO SUPPORT THE ALLEGATION OF TH E PERSONS WHO APPEAR ED BEFORE THE COMMIT TEE THAT CASES HAVE BEEN FOISTED ON THEM IN VIEW OF THEIR ACTIVE PARTICIPATION AGAINST THE NUCLEAR PLANT. THE JURY FOUND THAT MANY ARRESTS WERE MADE VERY ARBITRARILY. THE MECHANICAL AND ARBITRARY3
METHOD OF ARRESTS INDICATE THAT THE ISSUE WAS NOT THAT THE PERSONS CONCERNED HAD COMMITTED AN OFFENCE BUT WAS MORE TO PREVENT A NY KIND OF LEGITIMATE PROTEST OR DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AGAINST THE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT.
Denial of other rights...
The Hindu : News / Resources : A.P. Shah committee report on Kudankulam | REPORT (pdf)
No comments:
Post a Comment