Human Rights Watch criticizes shoot-at-sight orders in Assam

MUMBAI: The latest Human Rights Watch (HRW) diktat that India should revoke its "shoot at sight" order in Assam raises pertinent questions about the handling of ethnic violence in the northeastern state.

The state has witnessed ethnic violence between indigenous Bodo tribes and Muslim migrant settler reportedly killing 42 people and grievously injuring over 150 others. Earliest reports of violence date back to May possibly owing to land disputes and raises concerns about why the violence wasn't stemmed in the bud for over two months.

More worryingly, even once the issue came to the fore, there seems to have been a delay of nearly three days in the deployment of the Army, despite requests from the state government for reinforcement. This may have allowed the tension to escalate and cost many more innocent lives.

The 'shoot at sight' orders being executed then come across as a desperate attempt at a time when violence has rapidly spread.

The police firing has allegedly claimed six lives, drawing the ire of global human rights agencies. The firing by cops is not in keeping with the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms, stated a HRW release, pertinently pointing out that force should be the last resort adopted by police forces.

"'Shoot at sight' orders give a green light to security forces to use their firearms when it's neither necessary nor lawful to do so," said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at HRW, adding that ""security forces should comply with international standards that only permit the use of lethal force when absolutely necessary to protect life.""

In the short run, authorities should do all they can to curtail the situation; the crises also warrants a detailed and independent enquiry.

(2012-07-29/timesofindia)