Addressing the rights violations of the victims of insurgency in the Kashmir Valley
While delivering the judgment on Article 370 of the Constitution, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul of the Supreme Court of India also recommended the constitution of a truth and reconciliation commission to heal the wounds and suffering of the victims of the insurgency that gripped the Kashmir Valley, particularly in 1989-90.
Justice Kaul wrote that this may help to ‘achieve collective understanding of the human rights’ violations perpetrated by State and non-State actors, against people of the region’.
Since truth-telling provides an opportunity for victims to narrate their stories which may facilitate an acknowledgement from those responsible for perpetrating the wrongs, and from society as a whole, this may pave the way for reconciliation, he wrote separately in the Epilogue.
The purpose of a truth and reconciliation commission is to facilitate the process of reconciliation in societies that are divided during periods of violence and grave human rights abuses.
Providing them with acknowledgement, closure, and reparations
The most important function of a truth and reconciliation commission is to hold public hearings and record patterns of rights violations, as narrated by the victims as well as by the perpetrators.
The South African commission, for instance, had the power to grant amnesty in exchange for full disclosure by applicants.
Such a provision could attract controversy in India if applied uniformly to state and non-state actors.
Non-state actors in the Valley were terror groups, mostly financed by actors active across the border.
Even home-grown terror groups are known to have been brain-washed and trained by them.
It is important to note that the central government has denied permission in the past to prosecute certain members of the defence forces for alleged offences and rights violations.
As mentioned by Justice Kaul, the phase of involuntary migration (of Kashmiri Pandits) that took place in 1989-90 due to the second round of insurgency is the one that awaits rightful redress.
It is quite understandable that many victims might not be alive to seek closure of their loss and violations.
The truth and reconciliation commissions, if constituted immediately after the change of regime or end of hostilities or insurgency.
The truth and reconciliation commission, even if constituted without further delay, will have only limited utility.
COMMENTS