India in the World
● On January 7, the Maldives government suspended three deputy ministers who made allegedly derogatory comments about Indian Prime Minister Modi. Among others, one deputy minister had on social media called PM Modi a “clown”, after Modi posted a picture of himself snorkelling to promote tourism. Relations between India and the Maldives have reportedly been strained since Maldives President Muizzu came to power in November, with the Maldives demanding India withdraw its 75-personnel military presence. On January 14, the Maldives government gave India a March 15 deadline to comply.
● On January 11, Human Rights Watch published its World Report 2024, which noted that the Indian government “undermined its aspirations for global leadership as a rights-respecting democracy during 2023 with its persistent policies and practices that discriminate and stigmatize religious and other minorities”. It also notes that the BJP-led government also arrested activists, journalists, opposition politicians, and other critics of the government on politically motivated criminal charges, including terrorism. These policies and practices violate Articles 18, 26 and 27 of the ICCPR, which prohibit discrimination against and demand the equal treatment of people from religious minorities, and Article 19, which protects freedom of opinion and expression.
● On January 12, an initiative of Georgetown University published a factsheet on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, noting that “under his leadership, India has experienced a rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes and hate speech”. On January 4, Georgetown University also published a factsheet on the Hindu Swayamvewak Sangh (HSS), which it describes as “a right-wing Hindu non-profit organization” in the United States. The HSS is the foreign wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS), which a separate factsheet describes as a “Hindu nationalist, paramilitary” organization whose founders reportedly drew inspiration from fascism.
● On January 17, the European Parliament adopted a recommendation report on EU-India relations, which seeks to move human rights and democracy “from an appendix to the heart of EU-India relations”, Among other recommendations, the Parliament calls on the other EU institutions to “condemn acts of violence, increasing nationalistic rhetoric and divisive policies and call on leaders to cease making inflammatory statements” and to counter and condemn “hate speech that incites discrimination or violence against any religious minority”.
● On January 20, Home Minister Amit Shah announced the discontinuation of Free Movement Regime with Myanmar. The border will now be fenced and a visa will be required even for border residents. There are ongoing concerns about pushbacks of Rohingya refugees at the border, in violation of their right to seek asylum under Article 14 UDHR and the absolute prohibition of non-refoulement. The Kuki Inpi Manipur, a Kuki organisation in conflict-affected Manipur, expressed concern over the decision and reported that India and the European Union will hold the seventh round of negotiations over a proposed free trade agreement in mid-February. The discussions will reportedly cover matters related to services and investments after discussions on goods and public procurements in previous rounds.
● On January 26, French President Emmanuel Macron participated as guest of honour at India’s Republic Day celebrations. This comes as India, for the first reported time, is threatening to expel a French journalist, Vanessa Dougnac, who has been based in New Delhi since 2001. Dougnac, who is married to an Indian citizen, received a formal notice from the Indian authorities on January 18, demanding she surrender her residence permit. In September 2022, the government stripped Dougnac of her right to practice her profession, a decision that the Indian government has yet to justify. The French embassy in India was not able to revoke the decision. This may have serious implications for the right to freedom of expression and the right to impart and receive information (Article 19 of the ICCPR).
Civil society, human rights defenders and journalists
● On January 3, news reported that Kashmiri journalist Sajad Gul remains in jail, even though the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in November quashed his detention of journalist Sajad Gul. Gul was arrested in January 2022 under the “Public Safety Act”. The court said that there was no specific allegation against him to show that his activities could be “prejudicial to the security of the state”. His prolonged and arbitrary arrest therefore appears to violate the right to liberty (Article 9 ICCPR).
● On January 5, the Editors Guild of India voiced concern over the reported abuse of criminal defamation laws against journalists. This comes after the Jharkhand Police filed charges against news editors for their coverage on the state’s liquor mafia.
● On January 10, the Ministry of Home Affairs cancelled the Foreign Contributions Regulations act (FCRA) license of the Centre for Policy Research (CPR). CPR is a leading think tank in India, and a government official said CPR received the cancellation order for publishing reports on “current affairs programmes” that “are likely to affect the economic interest of the state and the violations are grave in nature.”. This development raises questions about the government’s potential violations of the freedom to seek, receive and publish information (Article 19 ICCPR).
● On January 22, police in Jammu and Kashmir arrested two individuals for allegedly making comments condemning the demolition of the Babri Mosque on social media, violating freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR). This took place as Prime Minister Modi inaugurated a Hindu Ram Temple at the site of the demolished mosque.
● On January 25, police in Kerala state registered a case against a 62-year-old Muslim activist for holding a one-man protest on January 22 against the demolition of the Babri Mosque, possibly violating the right to peaceful assembly (Article 21 ICCPR). Police charged him for “giving provocation with intent to cause riot”. This took place as Prime Minister Modi inaugurated a Hindu Ram Temple at the site of the demolished mosque.
● On January 28, human rights defender Sharjeel Imam has spent four years in pre-trial detention. Imam was arrested in 2020 accused of conspiracy during the Delhi Riots 2020, and has been repeatedly denied bail. On January 30, the Delhi High Court directed a trial court to decide on a fresh bail application by Imam within ten days. His prolonged detention without trial violates their right to “a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal established by law” (Article 14 ICCPR) and the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty as established in Article 9 ICCPR.
Hate Crimes and Hate Speech against Minorities
● On January 3, a family allegedly killed their adult daughter for marrying a Dalit (“untouchable”) man. Caste discrimination is pervasive and families often refuse to marry their children outside of their caste, raising serious concerns about the state’s ability to protect citizens’ right to life (Article 6 ICCPR).
● On January 6, students reportedly tricked a Dalit (“untouchable”) student into drinking urine, which raises questions about the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 7 ICCPR).
● On January 7, Hindu supremacists associated with Bajrang Dal (“Brigade of God Hanuman”) allegedly attacked a Christian missionary school in Madhya Pradesh state, with a video of the purported attack circulating on social media. On January 9, Hindu supremacists reportedly attacked two teenagers from the Muslim community in Karnataka state, after the teenagers had reportedly offered chocolates to a Hindu girl. On January 14, Hindu supremacists reportedly attacked a rikshaw-driver of the Muslim community, after one of his passengers accidentally spat tobacco on one of them. On January 22, Hindu supremacists reportedly assaulted and paraded a teenager from the Muslim community naked for allegedly disrespecting a Hindu flag. The police reportedly arrested the teenager instead of his attackers. All these incidents raise doubts about the state’s efforts to prohibit advocating religious hatred that incites discrimination, hostility or violence (Article 20 ICCPR).
● On January 7, police in Maharashtra state reportedly filed a case against two legislators from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for allegedly making speeches involving incitement to violence against Muslims at a rally. The incident may constitute a ruling party lawmaker advocating for religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (Article 20 ICCPR).
● On January 15, police filed a case against a headmistress of a school, who allegedly forced students to clean the school’s toilets under threat of physical violence. This may violate the prohibition of “manual scavenging” under India’s domestic law, i.e. the manual cleaning of human faeces and sanitation systems, which Dalits have historically been forced into, and which violates human dignity and constitutes inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 7 ICCPR).
● On January 16, police reportedly killed a young man from the Muslim community in a so-called “encounter” killing, violating the arbitrary deprivation of life (Article 6 ICCPR)
Religious Freedoms and Minority Rights
● On January 3, Uttar Pradesh police arrested two Hindu supremacists who had reportedly posed as Islamists and threatened to blow up a Hindu temple. Photos on their social media reportedly show the two men posing with leaders of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). This adds onto a list of cases in which people reportedly assume Muslim names when committing crimes.
● On January 5, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Uttar Pradesh state government on a plea challenging the constitutional validity of its November ban on halal-certified products. An official spokesperson claimed that the certification was being used to spread “propaganda” and “exploit religious sentiment”. The incident raised questions about the state’s ability to protect its citizens’ right to publicly manifest their religion (Article 18 ICCPR).
● On January 5, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea against a High Court order that dismissed a petition seeking to recognise the Shahi Idgah mosque as the birthplace of Hindu Lord Krishna. There have been several similar petitions filed by Hindu supremacists, and previous similar disputes have led to violence, most notably with a mob extrajudicially demolishing the Babri Mosque in 1992.
● On January 6, Uttar Pradesh police reportedly arrested a Muslim man for praying at the ruins of a 250-year-old mosque, on allegations of “promoting enmity”. According to a 1940 order by British colonial rule, praying at the ruin is prohibited, which may violate Article 18 of the ICCPR which protects the right to manifest one’s religion.
● On January 7, a catering service filed a complaint against a customer, who reportedly refused to pay the catering bill over the fact that a waitress was Muslim. The customer held this reason in writing in a note. This incident may have implications for hostility and religious hatred, for which advocacy shall be prohibited under Article 20 ICCPR.
● On January 7, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) former deputy Chief Minister KS Eshwarappa reportedly said that it would be better if Muslims voluntarily vacate mosques allegedly built on sites of temples, if they do not want to face repercussions. The incident may constitute a ruling party lawmaker advocating for religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (Article 20 ICCPR).
● On January 8, police arrested eight people in Madhya Pradesh state after people threw rocks at participants of a Hindu religious procession organised to celebrate the consecration ceremony for the Ram Temple. The police also imposed a ban on public gatherings, which may violate Article 22 of the ICCPR which guarantees the right to association.
● On January 8, Mumbai police registered a case against the creators of the film “Annapoorani: The Goddess of Food” on grounds of “hurting Hindu religious sentiment”. The film follows a dominant caste Hindu woman, who becomes India’s top chef, and also begins eating meat. The case was reportedly registered based on a complaint by a Hindu supremacist group, and may arbitrarily restrict freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR)
● On January 8, two groups clashed with each other after a Hindu supremacist procession by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad passed by. Police imposed a ban on public gatherings and on January 9 reportedly extrajudicially demolished two Muslim-owned properties, in violation of Article 11 of the ICESCR, which established the right to housing without discrimination based on religion.
● On January 15, police in Karnataka state filed a case against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Anantkumar Hegde after he reportedly said that a mosque in Bhatkal would be destroyed like the Babri Masjid in Uttar Pradesh was in 1992. Hegde also reportedly said that “the Hindu community won’t rest until more mosques are reclaimed”. This raises concerns about the state’s ability to prohibit religious hate speech that incites discrimination, hostility or violence (Article 20 ICCPR).
● On January 21, violence erupted when Muslim locals stopped a group of Hindu supremacists chanting “Jai Shri Ram” (Hail Lord Ram) in Mumbai, Maharashtra. On January 23, authorities extrajudicially demolished fifteen shops in Muslim-dominated area as retaliation, constituting a violation of the right to work (Article 6 ICESCR). Amnesty International called on the authorities to stop the punitive demolition of Muslim properties, noting that Article 11 ICESCR prohibits forced evictions.
● On January 22, Prime Minister Modi inaugurated the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, which has been described as a turning point in making India into a “Hindu nation”. 22 Indian diaspora groups warned that Prime Minister Modi inaugurating the temple would set a “dangerous precedent” and move India towards a “Hindu nation”, as opposed to a secular republic. In 1992, Hindu supremacists had extrajudicially demolished a mosque in the town, as they claimed that the site is the birthplace of God Ram, and riots erupted. Ahead of the inauguration of the temple, police had removed witness protection from victims of these riots. On January 9, Uttar Pradesh’s Chief Minister announced that all educational institutions in the state would be closed on the day, as the inauguration is a “national festival”. Central government offices were closed until the afternoon to “enable employees to participate in the celebrations”. Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Assam declared January 22 a “dry day” without alcohol. On January 10, the Congress Party said it would not attend the inauguration, claiming that it is serving the electoral interests of the BJP. The celebration, which reportedly gives legitimacy to vigilante violence, further encouraged religious hostility, with a wave of communal clashes and targeted attacks in the days before and after the inauguration. This raises serious concerns about the state’s reported complicity and non-intervention in religious hatred that incites discrimination, hostility or violence (Article 20 ICCPR).
● On January 26, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) legislator Acharya made comments on the hijab (Muslim veil) at a school, asking: “What is this deal with hijab? Are the girls married?” In response, Muslim students started protests for the right to wear the hijab. Another state in India had imposed a ban on hijabs in school, arguably in violation of the right to “manifest [one’s] religion or belief in workshop, observance, practice or teaching” (Article 18 ICCPR) and their right to education (Article 13 ICESCR).
● On January 28, Union Minister Shantanu Thakur reportedly announced that the discriminatory Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) would be implemented within the next seven days. The CAA allows the government to fast-track asylum claims of irregular immigrants from specific communities, but not Muslims. The OHCHR called the CAA “fundamentally discriminatory in nature”, as it adds a religious criterion to citizenship, and the European Parliament expressed concern about it for violating freedom of religion (Article 18 ICCPR).
● On January 28, police in Chhattisgarh state arrested a school headmaster after he encouraged following Buddhism and discouraged belief in Hindu Gods. Police charged him for promoting enmity between different groups. This may violate the right of everyone to “manifest his religion or belief in workshop, observance, practice or teaching” (Article 18 ICCPR) and to freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR).
Internet and Technology
● On January 10, the World Economic Forum in its “Global Risks Report 2024” concluded that misinformation and disinformation pose the greatest risk to India ahead of the upcoming parliamentary elections. The report gives the example of a BBC documentary examining Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s role in the 2002 Gujarat riots, which was taken down by X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube last January at the behest of the BJP government to highlight how “a crackdown on real or perceived foreign interference could be used to consolidate existing control”.
● On January 10, at least two review petitions were filed before the Supreme Court challenging its December 2023 judgement that had upheld the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution, which stripped Jammu and Kashmir of its semi-autonomous status. The Supreme Court had left petitions on the abrogation of Article 370 pending since 2019. Following the abrogation in 2019, the government imposed a crackdown, with the longest internet shutdown ever recorded in an alleged democracy, violating the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and freedom of association under Articles 19, 21 and 22 of the ICCPR.
● On January 15, the Editors Guild of India made public a letter from 2022, in which they addressed the Minister for Information and Broadcasting with concerns over the newly introduced Broadcast Services Regulation Bill. They warned that the new bill would prove “adverse to the spirit of freedom of speech and freedom of the press guaranteed by the Constitution”, which is also guaranteed under Article 19 ICCPR, and would pave the way for the establishment of an “overarching censorship framework.”
● On January 16, X reportedly withheld the account of Hindutva Watch in India, following a demand by India’s central government, violating rights protecting the freedom of speech (ICCPR Article 19) and potentially breaching the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which sets out a corporate responsibility to protect Human Rights. On January 31, the Indian government blocked access to their website and that of India Hate Lab. Hindutva Watch is a research initiative that monitors hate speech and incitement to violence.
● On January 31, the Bombay High Court delivered a split verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the Information Technology Rules, which was amended in April 2023 to empower the government to identify and label “fake news”. While some judges criticised that the state would decide what is true and false, others noted that the Rules “were not directly penalising” and “did not bring any chilling effect on their rights.” The petitions will need to be reheard by an uneven number of judges. The judges must ensure that when restricting freedom of speech under Article 19 ICCPR, the Indian government does not do so for arbitrary reasons not listed in Article 19(3).
Political Parties and Election Monitoring
● On January 3, the Assocation for Democratic Reform published a report that found that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) received more than 70.6% of total donations from electoral trusts in 2022-23.
● On January 9, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Uttar Pradesh state appointed a leader who was accused in the 2018 Bulandshahr violence case, during which a police officer was killed, as the party’s zonal president.
● On January 14, Congress opposition party leader Rahul Gandhi began a “yatra” (journey) across India, in which he announced to want to march for 6700km and engage with people across the country ahead of India’s general elections. Gandhi previously did a “yatra” in September 2022. On January 21, Hindu supremacists reportedly attacked the yatra, leading to Gandhi being evacuated and others being injured. On January 23, participants of the yatra reportedly tried to push through police barricades, resulting in minor violence. Police later registered a case against Gandhi and others for “acts of violence, provocation, damage to public property and assault on police personnel”, which may on further investigation have implications for the right to freedom of assembly (Article 21 ICCPR).
Legislative
● On January 10, the term of panchayats (local village councils) in Jammu and Kashmir ended. This leaves residents in Jammu and Kashmir without any elected representatives and gives effective control to central government appointed authorities, in potential violation of the right to take part in the government of one’s country through freely chosen representatives (Article 21 UDHR).
Executive
● On January 6, West Bengal police filed a case against Enforcement Directorate officials for alleged “criminal trespass” and “intending to outrage a woman’s modesty”. The officials had reportedly “attempted to force their way into” the home of a female Trinamool Congress party leader in connection with an alleged ration distribution scam.
● On January 7, news reported that a police officer in Uttar Pradesh state was charged for allegedly repeatedly raping a 23-year-old woman and forcing her to have an abortion. On January 14, a Muslim couple filed a complaint against seven police officers, for alleged torture resulting in kidney failure in police custody in 2023. These incidents constitute a violation of Article 7 of the ICCPR, which protects individuals from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
● On January 10, Forum Against Corporatization and Militarization (FACAM) held a protest against the reported killing of a 6-month-old infant in Bastar region, Chhattisgarh, on 1st January 2024. This incident may have implications on the right to life (Article 6 ICCPR) and the prohibition of targeting civilians under International Humanitarian Law, which applies in the Bastar conflict area.
● On January 18, AlJazeera reported that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has reportedly held backdoor negotiations with the Finance Commission of India to significantly cut funds allocated to the country’s states. According to AlJazeera, this relevation comes after a top government official admitted publicly that the prime minister and his team tried to restrict states’ finances.
Judiciary
● On January 8, India’s Supreme Court quashed the remission given to 11 Hindu supremacists and ordered their return to prison for having gang raped then pregnant Bilkis Bano and murdered her relatives during the 2002 Gujarat riots. The attackers had been granted remission in August 2022 by the Gujarat government. The United Kingdom has concluded that Narendra Modi, who was then Chief Minister of Gujarat state, was “directly responsible” for the systematic violence in the 2002 Gujarat riots.
● On January 8, the Karnataka High Court questioned the implementation of the prohibition of manual scavenging, the manual removal and cleaning of human excreta, which is predominantly done by Dalits (“untouchables”). It noted that there has not been “even a single conviction” under the law. Manual scavenging violates human dignity and constitutes inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 7 ICCPR).
● On January 9, the Gujarat High Court dismissed human rights defender Sanjeev Bhatt’s appeal against his life sentence. Bhatt’s requests to provide additional evidence had been denied. Additionally, the Supreme Court of India had imposed a fine of 3 lakh rupees (3424.2 Euros) on Bhatt for filing petitions in court, raising questions about access to justice and the right to equality before the law under Article 26 of the ICCPR. Bhatt, a former police officer, has been in jail since 2018 on reportedly fabricated charges after whistleblowing on the alleged involvement of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the 2002 Gujarat riots.
● On January 15, the Guwahati High Court sought an explanation from the Assam state government on the alleged extrajudicial demolition of the homes of five Muslims as extra-legal punishment for an alleged crime in 2022. The demolitions likely contradict the right to housing (Article 11 ICESCR).
● On January 17, the Supreme Court declined to prohibit a rally by a Hindu supremacist group and BJP legislator T Raja Singh, who are known for hate speech and incitement to violence. However, the Court ordered authorities to take appropriate steps to prevent hate speech at the rally.
● On January 19, a Delhi court added charges of “attempt to murder” to the chargesheet of human rights defenders Ishrat Jahan, Khalid Saifi and others in the Delhi Riots case. Them and other human rights defenders protested against the discriminatory Citizenship Amendment Act, when riots erupted in North East Delhi in 2020, which they are accused of having incited. Bail petitions have been repeatedly denied, due procedure in related cases was not followed, and trials are pending, in violation of their right to “a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal established by law” (Article 14 ICCPR) and the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty as established in Article 9 ICCPR.
● On January 20, news reported that Rohingya refugees in Delhi filed a Public Interest Petition (PIL), seeking protection under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, right to life as they face violence “as a result of dissemination of hate remarks targeting them on the basis of their ethnicity and religion” on Facebook. The petitioners claim that Facebook’s inaction against hate speech on its platform harms them and that the posts that target them have Indian origin. On January 30, the Delhi High Court disposed the petition, stating that “prior censorship of any publication of Rohingyas on Facebook is an example of ‘a treatment that is worse than the disease’”. The petitioners are “at liberty to avail the redressal mechanism as per IT Rules, 2021, with respect to any objectionable posts.”
● On January 31, a Varanasi court passed a court order allowing Hindus to worship inside a sealed basement of Gyanvapi mosque, likely violating India’s 1947 Places of Worship Act, which froze the status of all existing places of worship and prohibits their conversion. Beyond domestic legislation, the court order also violates Article 26 of the ICCPR, whereby all persons are guaranteed equality before the law without any discrimination.
Business and Economy
● On January 3, the Supreme Court refused to transfer an investigation into alleged money laundering by the Adani Group to a special investigation team. The Adani Group is accused of serious market manipulation and accounting fraud, and previous investigations have identified close ties to and favouritism by the Modi government.
● On January 16, news announced that India bought exploration and production rights to lithium blocks in Argentina in its first such overseas deal, worth $24 million, aimed to reduce dependency on China for the key green technology metal. India imported $33 million worth of lithium in 2022-2023, with more than two-thirds imported from China.
● On January 22, a report from the Marathwada divisional commissioner’s office revealed that 1088 farmers died by suicide in eight districts of the region in Maharashtra in 2023. This is 65 more such deaths than were reported in 2022. These suicides question the state’s ability to provide the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living (Article 11 ICESCR) and the right to life (Article 6 ICCPR).
Armed Conflict in Manipur
Since May 3, 2023, there has been an ongoing armed conflict in Manipur, North-Eastern India, after longstanding ethnic conflict between the Kuki (mostly Christian) and the Meitei (mostly Hindu, but also Christian and Muslim).
● On January 1, unidentified armed persons wearing police uniforms killed four and injured 14 other people in Manipur state. This has consequences for the state’s ability to protect the right to life (Article 6 ICCPR)
● On January 5, the Manipur police arrested Dhanabir Maibam, the editor of a local newspaper in Manipur state, on charges of allegedly promoting enmity between communities. This came after he reported on the deterioration of law and order in a border town, raising concerns regarding police limitations on the freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR). On January 7, a court granted him bail.
● On January 9, Manipur Chief Minister Biren Singh said that an all-tribe committee would decide whether the Kuki community would be removed from the Scheduled Tribes (ST) list, which gives them the right to buy land in the hill areas of Manipur. There are concerns that this will not address the root causes of the conflict and rather fan further tensions, while likely violating Article 26 of the ICCPR, whereby states are obliged to treat all persons equally before the law. In April 2023, the Manipur High Court had directed the state government of Manipur to give recommendations to the Central government for the inclusion of the Meitei community in the ST list. Local activists accuse the BJP government of targeting Kukis over the past years. Kukis feared that granting Meitei an ST status would enable them to purchase land in the prohibited hilly areas, and following a peaceful rally on May 3, 2023, violence escalated.
● On January 11, security personnel found three missing men dead. The Coordinating Committee on Manipur Integrity, a Meitei organisation, then demanded that Chief Minister Singh replace the security adviser of the state, arguing that the “prevailing security arrangements have undeniably failed” and that the role of the security adviser over the past eight months of the conflict in the state “has been utterly ineffective, with no discernible signs of improvement.”, raising concerns about the state’s inability to protect the right to life (Article 6 ICCPR).
● On January 17, assailants reportedly killed two Meitei police officers using grenades. On the same day, a mob injured three Border Security Forces personnel. Local women took to the streets to protest the killings and demanded more state security forces, illustrating the inability of the state to protect the right to life (Article 6 ICCPR). Police later arrested two men, one of them reportedly a local BJP leader, in connecting with the killing.
Compiled by The London Story.
