You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
India-Pakistan
India charges five army officers over civilian deaths in Kashmir
2006-05-12
SRINAGAR, India - IndiaÂ’s top investigating agency on Thursday charged five army officers with murdering five civilians who had wrongly been described as militants in Indian Kashmir, a court official said.

The charges were filed against a brigadier, a lieutenant colonel, two majors and a junior commissioned officer in Srinagar, summer capital of Muslim-majority Indian Kashmir where a revolt has raged against New Delhi’s rule since 1989. “The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has filed charges against the accused army men for their involvement in the killing of five civilians,” a court official said in Srinagar.

He said the charges filed before a chief judicial magistrate in Srinagar included murder, abduction with intention to murder, wrongful confinement, criminal conspiracy and destruction of evidence. The army must say by the next hearing on May 24 whether it would launch court martial proceedings against the accused or would like them to be tried by a civilian court.

The army claimed in March 2000 it had killed five “hardcore” Islamic militants whom they said were involved in the massacre of 37 Kashmiri Sikhs in the southern district of Anantnag earlier that month. But huge public protests over what villagers said was the gunning down of innocent civilians forced the government to have the bodies undergo DNA testing. The tests proved the five were civilians and not rebels.
Now let's see if the courts can handle this ...
The Sikh massacre coincided with the arrival of then-US president Bill Clinton in India. Rebel groups denied responsibility for the massacre and blamed security forces whom they charged were seeking to “to malign” them.

The CBI was asked to investigate the case by former Kashmir chief minister Farooq Abdullah.
Posted by:Steve White

#7  Rantburg University lectures are always welcome, pihkalbadger. Thanks!
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-05-12 22:48  

#6  Thanks. Now it's clear. But the story should have said "missing locals", not the very less informative "civilians.".
Posted by: PBMcL   2006-05-12 22:29  

#5  "Rebels have different DNA than civilians? How's that work?"

Relatives of the victim come foreward and dna can be matched against the suspect, therefor proving that its not the named individual the Indian army is looking for.
Sorry for being pedantic, but genetics is genetics and always right.
Posted by: pihkalbadger   2006-05-12 18:37  

#4  Now let's see if the courts can handle this .

From an Indian report...

Allegations that security forces act with impunity seem to be based more on prejudice than fact. Complaints of human rights violations have in fact been on a steady decline, mirroring the overall fall in levels of violence in Jammu and Kashmir. From 142 in 2001, complaints went down to 74 in 2002, 25 in 2003, 16 in 2004, and just seven in 2005. Seventy-nine Border Security Force personnel and 134 soldiers received sentences ranging up to life imprisonment for human rights violations between 1990 and 2004.
Posted by: john   2006-05-12 17:22  

#3  The counterinsurgency unit probably laid an ambush and these locals got caught up in it. Then it was a matter of covering their behinds.
Posted by: john   2006-05-12 17:19  

#2  "rebel" here means Pakistani (ignore for a moment how a Pakistani can be rebelling against India, that is media stupidity).

The army was under pressure to find the terrorists responsible for the massacre and some people were killed. It was claimed by this COIN unit that they were militants .. ie infiltrated Pakistanis..

Villagers however had missing kin and suspected the bodies in the graves were their relatives.
DNA testing revealed this to be so.

Posted by: john   2006-05-12 17:11  

#1  Rebels have different DNA than civilians? How's that work?
Posted by: PBMcL   2006-05-12 02:36  

00:00