E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

Indian anti-terrorism troops accused of executing civilians
The government in Indian-controlled Kashmir last night ordered a judicial inquiry after its security forces were accused of being behind a series of executions of civilians under the guise of fighting terrorism. An investigation by the Indian Express newspaper claimed that special operations squads had killed a carpenter and two labourers claiming they were Pakistani fighters. In at least one case, cash rewards were given to troops, it said.

"We have no hesitation in ordering a probe by a high court judge," Ghulam Nabi Azad, an elected official, said last night.

In each instance, Indian soldiers said a Kashmiri man was killed during a battle between security forces and militants. However it has emerged that none of the three men who were killed were at the encounters.
Sounds like the RAB has been giving lessons. Anyone find a shutter gun at the scene?
Kashmir police stumbled upon the killings when investigating the disappearance of Abdul Rahman Paddar, a carpenter reported missing in Srinagar in December 2006. Officers traced his mobile phone to a fellow inspector who admitted Paddar had been kidnapped and killed. "This epidemic of fake 'crossfire' 'encounter killings' by the security forces has plagued Kashmir for too long," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The police must stop their standard operating procedure of killing people in custody."
Let's let HRW take them home with them.
The elected state leadership came to power with a promise of "zero tolerance" for human rights abuses. "The real test of the commitment to investigate the killing is whether all those responsible, including senior officials who authorised it, are successfully prosecuted," said Mr Adams.

In a tense atmosphere where death is never far away, it is an unacknowledged reality that extrajudicial executions by Indian security forces take place. A number of officials told Human Rights Watch last year that Indian forces executed alleged militants instead of bringing them to trial in the belief that detention invited a security risk.
And the risk that an idiot judge would let them loose, or that a conniving lawyer would twist the legal process for the purposes of terrorism. We've seen that here at home.

Posted by: Steve White 2007-02-01
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=179242