Rapist CPM cadres: shame on
you.

Rapist CPM cadres, shame on you
for what you did in Singur and Nandigram. There is no prayasc'ittam for you in
this janmam. Go and drown in Gangasagar.

The full report of Amnesty Interntional which follows, should be read by
every citizen of the world. Every member of the CPM cadre should introspect and
resign their card-holding membership and stop supporting the party. The ruling
CPM party should be disbanded. The ruling junta should be thrown out.

This report is a report of shame on the CPM and its goons egged on by the
junta who have forfeited their right to rule sonar Bangla. What type of cadres
are these that assault women and children? What type of adharma leaders are
these?

Kalyan

Sutirtho
Patranobis, Hindustan
Times

Email Author

New Delhi, January 16, 2008

First Published: 01:53 IST(16/1/2008)

Last Updated: 01:58 IST(16/1/2008)

CPM targeted women in Nandigram:
Amnesty

Women leading the agitation against land acquisition in Nandigram were
singled out and targeted by CPM supporters, a report by the India chapter of the
Amnesty International said on Tuesday.

Several women left behind
after the men fled were raped, assaulted, threatened and harassed. Many were
forced to attend CPM meetings, the report said. While cases of sexual violence
against women were registered — in some the victims also named the perpetrators
— the suspects are yet to be arrested.

The report also alleged that
the violence in November took place against the backdrop of the Bengal
government's inaction along with tacit acceptance of the tactics adopted by CPM
cadres. 

The report titled 'Urgent
Need to Address Large Scale Human Rights Abuse During Nandigram "Recapture"' was
released on Tuesday. It has been compiled by a four-member Amnesty delegation,
which, led by Justice (retired) S.N. Bhargava, visited the villages in Nandigram
in the last week of November.

"The women were targeted
because they were active in the agitation. All the women who we interviewed
categorically told us that they were targeted. In fact, they are still being
threatened with violence in the future if they reveal what happened," delegation
member, advocate Vrinda Grover said.

The report said: "Also, the
delegation was informed by local residents that many women had refused to file
police reports as they were still afraid of the consequences and were also
unwilling to risk social censure associated with rape."

Grover said an independent
judicial enquiry was urgently needed to look into the cases of human rights
abuse. "The Central Bureau of Investigation is looking into the violence of
March while the state Criminal Investigative Department is looking into the
incidents of November. Local residents were decidedly less enthusiastic about
the CID probe."

Grover said the judicial
enquiry should look into the role of different officials, including senior
police officers, in the violence. "They need to come under the scanner. There
should be a broad accountability and the findings of the time-bound enquiry
should be made public."

http://tinyurl.com/2vxlsh

India: Urgent Inquiry Needed Into
Nandigram Violence

(New York, January 15, 2008) – The West Bengal state government in India
should immediately create an independent and impartial inquiry into serious acts
of violence in Nandigram since early 2007, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty
International India said today.

The state government should prosecute
those responsible for human rights abuses and examine both the social-political
origins of the violence and the failure of state authorities to provide
effective protection to the community.  
 
A fact-finding team –
comprised of Justice (Retd) S.N. Bhargava, former Chief Justice, High Court of
Sikkim; Vrinda Grover, advocate; Meenakshi Ganguly, senior South Asia researcher
at Human Rights Watch; and Mukul Sharma, director of Amnesty International India
– visited Nandigram and Kolkata from November 28 to 30, 2007. The team travelled
to affected villages and relief camps, and met with the victims of the violence
in Nandigram, as well as government officials and rights activists.  

 
"It was obvious during our visit to Nandigram that state authorities
had not acted in an impartial manner," said Meenakshi Ganguly, senior South Asia
researcher at Human Rights Watch. "The political nature of this violence,
involving the ruling party of West Bengal, means there must be an independent
inquiry to prevent impunity for the perpetrators."  
 
Throughout 2007,
tensions over control of land in Nandigram led to a series of violent incidents
between supporters of the ruling Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) and
farmers belonging to the Bhumi Ucched Pratirodh Committee (BUPC). Protesting
villagers blockaded the Nandigram area to oppose a government plan to acquire
land for industry. Instead of responding appropriately to violations of the law
by protesters, the authorities appeared to treat the protest as a challenge to
the CPI-M and used excessive force against the protesters. BUPC members were
also responsible for acts of violence. At least 30 people were killed, hundreds
injured, and thousands displaced from their homes.  
 
In November, CPI-M
supporters and armed thugs forcibly ended the blockade. In retribution for the
protest, they attacked villagers supporting the BUPC, burned down their homes,
threatened further violence if villagers went to the authorities, and humiliated
them by compelling them to join CPI-M rallies. The state administration removed
police posts before CPI-M supporters advanced into the area, strongly suggesting
governmental complicity in the abuses.  
 
Villagers in affected areas
reported to the fact-finding team that CPI-M supporters frequently subjected
women to violent attacks, including rape and beatings, as well as to threats and
harassment. There is no evidence that the police have sought to arrest those
named in police complaints. Victims, particularly women who risk social censure
by reporting rape, remained vulnerable to threats and further attacks from
perpetrators who roam free.  
 
"The tragedy of the reported rapes at
Nandigram has been compounded by the failure of the police to seriously
investigate these cases, keeping the victims at grave risk," said Ganguly.

 
Based on the team's findings, Amnesty International India has produced
a report titled "Urgent need to address large scale human rights abuses during
Nandigram 'recapture.'" The report concludes that the inaction of the West
Bengal state government, including tacit acceptance of the violent operations of
the armed supporters of the CPI-M, resulted in serious human rights abuses,
including unlawful killings, abductions, sexual assault of women and forced
eviction and displacement of thousands of people in 2007.  
 
It is
disturbing that the West Bengal authorities failed to prevent the violence at
Nandigram and failed to arrest the perpetrators," said Mukul Sharma, director of
Amnesty International India. "Weeks after peace had supposedly been restored, we
learned that the perpetrators were still roaming free, celebrating their victory
by threatening and beating up local residents."  
 
The impunity enjoyed
by those perpetrating abuses in Nandigram since the violence began in early 2007
fueled the widespread abuses committed later in the year. The chief minister of
West Bengal, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, contributed to the violence in November by
saying that the protesters had been "paid back in the same coin," a comment
which he retracted three weeks later, admitting the events were a "political and
administrative failure."  
 
Amnesty International India and Human Rights
Watch said that access to justice for the victims of the violence went beyond
the successful prosecution of those responsible. The West Bengal government has
an obligation to protect the rights of all those displaced by ensuring they can
safely return to their homes and places of habitual residence and providing
restitution for all damage suffered. Women who suffered abuse must receive
proper protection and an effective remedy.  
 
"The authorities must show
clear political will to end the climate of violence in Nandigram," Sharma said.
"For lasting peace, all those responsible for the violence must be prosecuted
and the victims must receive redress."

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/01/15/india17753_txt.htm

Report
Content

AMNESTY
INTERNATIONAL
AI
Index: ASA 20/001/2008

15
January 2008

India :
Urgent need to address large scale human rights abuses during Nandigram
"recapture"

Amnesty
International is concerned at reports that a range of serious human rights
abuses, including unlawful killings, abductions, sexual assault of women and
forced eviction and displacement of thousands of persons, have been carried out
at Nandigram in East Medinipore District in the eastern Indian state of West
Bengal. This report focuses on recent abuses, in the context of violence in late
October and November 2007, which were reportedly carried out by armed supporters
of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which leads the ruling Left
Front coalition in the state.

The
organisation is also concerned that these abuses took place in the face of
inaction by or acquiescence of the Government of West Bengal which to date has
also failed to order an independent inquiry into the November 2007 violence.

1.
Background

Throughout
2007, Nandigram has experienced violence as CPI-M supporters and farmers
belonging to the Bhumi Uchched Pratirodh Committee (Anti-displacement
front, BUPC) clashed with each other in attempting to gain control over parts of
the area.

On
28 December 2006, authorities at the neighbouring port town of Haldia circulated
a notice announcing plans to set up a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) at Nandigram
under the Government of India's Petro-Chemical Petroleum Investment
Region(PCPIR) scheme. ¹The
project, envisaged as a chemical hub, reportedly required at least 4,000
hectares of land for the proposed SEZ, which was to be jointly developed by the
state-owned Industrial Development Corporation and the Indonesia-based Salim
group of companies. The land is owned by local farmers.

The
BUPC had been formed to protest against forced eviction and displacement of
local inhabitants, mostly farmers, as a result of this project. It consisted of
activists owing allegiance to several political parties including the Trinamool
Congress (TMC), Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI), Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP), Congress(I) and former supporters of the CPI-M.

A
range of abuses including unlawful killings, forced evictions, excessive use of
force by police, widespread violence against women, as well as failure of the
authorities to provide protection to the victims, denial of access and
information to the media and human rights organisations, harassment of human
rights defenders and the continuing denial of justice to the victims have been
reported from Nandigram during the year. The scale of such abuses recently
intensified when violence broke out towards the end of October between
supporters of the ruling CPI-M, and supporters of the BUPC.

In
January and March 2007, at least 25 people, mostly local residents, were killed
and more than 100 injured and at least 20 women sexually assaulted by armed
supporters of the ruling CPI-M, after 1,500 people, mostly CPI-M supporters,
were forcibly displaced from their homes as the BUPC set up barricades to
prevent access to some of the disputed land. On 14 March, 14 people were
reportedly shot dead by police and over 150 injured in violent confrontations
between police, supporters of the CPI-M and BUPC supporters protesting against
their displacement due to the proposed industrial project. After this, the
Government of West Bengal announced that the industrial project would be
relocated. However the BUPC continued its blockade as it doubted that the
Government of West Bengal would in fact relocate the project.

Protests
continued in Nandigram with the demands for justice and compensation to the
victims of the 14 March firing being added to the existing demands.

Various
Indian activists and human rights organisations have reported that a wide range
of human rights abuses occurred during this period. ²Amnesty
International has repeatedly expressed its concerns about the excessive use of
force by the police, called for full consultation with those living in the area
about the proposed development and called for investigations into the abuses. ³

During
the latest outbreak of violence in Nandigram beginning on 6 November 2007, at
least 15 people were reportedly killed, 100 injured and hundreds of people were
displaced as groups of armed supporters of the CPI-M commenced an operation to
"recapture" the area. Media and human rights organisations reported large scale
violence initiated by armed CPI-M supporters, and alleged inaction by the
state's law enforcement agencies who, according to the reports, failed to take
steps to protect local inhabitants.

Reports
stated that armed CPI-M supporters rode their motorcycles into the area on 6
November, attacking local residents with guns and home-made bombs and fighting
with BUPC supporters. On 12 November, two units of the paramilitary Central
Reserve Police Force (CRPF) were deployed in some of the areas in which violence
had occurred, reportedly only after CPI-M supporters had stopped blocking their
route. Subsequently five more units of the CRPF were deployed. In the meantime,
for over five days CPI-M supporters had reportedly established control of the
area, forcibly evicting and displacing scores of people and attacking BUPC
supporters and other local residents while looting and burning down houses and
destroying property. During this period, the media and human rights
organisations were excluded from the majority of these areas as CPI-M supporters
blocked the main highways.

On
9 November, the Governor of the State, Gopalakrishna Gandhi, described the
situation in Nandigram as a "civil war" and stated that the "armed recapture is
unlawful and unacceptable." ⁴India's
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) sought a report from the Government of
West Bengal on the violence and a six-member NHRC investigative team, which
visited the area on 15-19 November, is expected to submit a report in the next
few weeks. Meanwhile, the NHRC chairperson Justice Rajendra Babu has stated, in
a reply to CPI-M members of the Indian parliament that it was incontrovertible
that human rights abuses on a mass scale took place at Nandigram. ⁵

Reports
from survivors, eyewitnesses, and relief workers alleged that months of
discussions had taken place in the town of Khejuri between CPI-M supporters on
their plans to "recapture" Nandigram. CPI-M supporters, armed with weapons, had
reportedly been mobilized from other parts of West Bengal and neighbouring
states of Jharkhand and Bihar. ⁶Both
the state administration and the police reportedly took little action to protect
the local communities during the violence, and in some cases were alleged to
have participated in attacks. The reports also stated that CPI-M supporters were
involved in searching villages, detaining and interrogating persons suspected to
be close to the BUPC and seizing weapons.

Amnesty
International also learnt that hundreds of residents including women and
children who managed to flee the violence were housed in two camps at Nandigram.
A week after the violence, media and human rights organisations, which had
limited access to these camps, reported that the camps were largely self-managed
with very limited official assistance, and those in the camps did not have
secure access to even minimum essential levels of food, water, shelter,
sanitation, and health services. Relief materials had been provided mainly by
human rights and humanitarian organisations. Medical teams from non-governmental
organisations were able to reach the camps only after four attempts were blocked
by CPI-M supporters.

Following
this, during 28-30 November 2007, Amnesty International India took part in a
research visit to Nandigram and Kolkata, the delegation comprising also a former
high court chief justice, a senior lawyer and a researcher from Human Rights
Watch. The delegation travelled to interior villages and relief camps, and met
with the victims of the violence, relevant officials and others. This report
sets out Amnesty International's concerns arising out of the findings of the
visit

2.
Preliminary Findings

a.
Failure to protect local communities:

At
Bhoota Mar in Gorchakraberia in Nandigram, the delegation members were informed
by relatives of CPI-M supporters that, on 28 October 2007, BUPC supporters had
vandalized their residences. The police said they had little access to interior
villages as blockades had been erected by the BUPC. However, the delegation was
informed by officials that there were sufficiently early reports from
intelligence officials and local police that armed supporters of the CPI-M were
gathering around Nandigram. ⁷This
was also admitted by the District Superintendent of Police Satya Prakash Panda
who informed the delegation that the police had information that "arms and
people were being mobilized in the region." ⁸The
risk of confrontation between BUPC and CPI-M supporters intensified towards 30
October, but the only remaining police posted at Nandigram were withdrawn
without any reasons being given. District Superintendent of Police Satya Prakash
Panda told the delegation members that orders to withdraw the remaining police
came from his superiors in Kolkata. ⁹However,
it was not until 12 November 2007 that CRPF personnel were deployed to
Nandigram.

The
withdrawal of the state police and the delay before CPRF personnel were deployed
left a period of two weeks in which the CPI-M and the BUPC engaged in armed
confrontations attempting to assert control over the area. There appears to have
been a controversy as to the reasons for the delay in deploying the CRPF. On 13
November, the state Chief Minister, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, alleged that it was
the Union Government which had caused the delay. ¹⁰He
said he had requested their deployment on 27 October but that several days later
the Union Government informed him that the CRPF personnel could not be sent to
Nandigram at that time as it was necessary to send them to other states where
state assembly polls were to be held in December (Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh).
On 5 November, the day before the armed CPI-M supporters arrived in Nandigram,
the state Home Secretary P R Roy said he was not aware when the CRPF forces
would be despatched there. ¹¹However,
the Union Minister of State for Home Affairs, Sriprakash Jaiswal, said on 16
November that there was no delay in the deployment of CRPF in Nandigram. ¹²

The
Government of West Bengal had already been excluded from several areas in
Nandigram by BUPC barricades and armed CPI-M supporters, and the withdrawal of
the state police meant that between the end of October and 11 November there was
no significant official security presence in the area. Displaced persons in
relief camps and eyewitnesses informed the delegation that during this period
CPI-M supporters had closed in on several villages including Sonachura,
Adhikaripara, Satengbari and Gokulnagar which had been barricaded by the BUPC.
In these villages, residences of BUPC leaders were looted and burnt down by
CPI-M supporters. By 11 November, the entire area had been "recaptured" by the
CPI-M supporters, resulting in the forced eviction and displacement of hundreds
of persons including women and children. During this period, the media (apart
from one reporter from the daily Dainik Statesman who chose to stay with
the local population) was prevented from entering the villages by CPI-M
supporters. On 12 November, a team of social activists from Kolkata was able to
start visiting some of the areas in Nandigram. Its report gives a graphic
account of the difficulties encountered by that team and the media during the
visits. ¹³

From
the above accounts, it is clear that the recent violence in Nandigram took place
against a backdrop of inaction by the Government of West Bengal, including tacit
acceptance of the violent operations of the armed supporters of the CPI-M. The
state has a responsibility to protect the human rights of everyone within its
jurisdiction, and accordingly to uphold law and order. This would include, where
necessary, measures by law enforcement agencies such as taking appropriate
action to end the blockade by the BUPC. But the manner in which the state
authorities have acted, and in particular their failure to take action to
prevent abuses by armed supporters of the CPI-M, suggests that they were not
acting in an impartial manner. No arrests were carried out prior to the violence
despite the flow of intelligence information that arms were being mobilised in
the region; no search operations were carried out. No arrests were carried out
during the period of the violence, and West Bengal Director-General of Police,
Anup Bhushan Vohra has stated that since the police only had access the nearby
town of Khejuri, where it was likely that only CPI-M supporters would have been
arrested, no arrests had been ordered as "it would have been seen as partisan.
" ¹⁴

Many
local residents were caught up in the violence and, in the absence of sufficient
protection from state law enforcement agencies, had to flee their homes and take
refuge with relatives or in relief camps. The delegation found evidence to
demonstrate that both the state administration and the police appeared to have
taken little action or responsibility to exercise due diligence in preventing,
stopping and punishing human rights abuses and to protect the local communities
during the violence.

b.
Victims of violence:

The
numbers as well as the identities of persons killed and missing from Nandigram
during this period remain unknown. Officials gave the delegation a list of five
persons who died during the violence, but local authorities stated to the
delegation that at least 42 people were reported missing from the days of the
November 2007 violence, many of whom were presumed to have been killed. BUPC
activists informed the delegation that an unknown number of persons, including
BUPC supporters, had gone missing; some of whom might have gone into hiding
fearing attack by CPI-M supporters. The BUPC stated in addition that complaints
made to the police about missing persons had not been properly registered.

On
5 December, a grave with the remains of five half-burnt bodies was discovered at
Bamanchok village near Khejuri. ¹⁵.
Investigating agencies were trying to establish whether, as claimed by the
CPI-M, the five persons were CPI-M supporters, including four from Gokulnagar
near Nandigram and one from Belda, 50 km from Nandigram, who were killed in a
bomb blast on 28 October. ¹⁶Conflicting
information received from local residents by the Association for the Protection
of Democratic Rights (APDR), however, alleged that they had been killed while
making bombs at Sherkhan Chak ¹⁷.

On
8 December, human remains were recovered from the Talpati canal in Bhangabera
near Nandigram. ¹⁸On
12 December, another body with two bullet holes was found in a field at
Maheshpur. Shyamali Pramanick, a woman from the area, was reported to have
claimed that the deceased was her husband, Harun Pramanik, a BUPC supporter who
had been missing since 7 November. ¹⁹On
14 December, two more local women, Sumitra Mirda and Annapurna Mondol, arrived
at the Tamluk hospital to lay claim to the body. They said their husbands had
been missing since 7 November. ²⁰

c.
Violence against women

The
delegation interviewed several women who had been subjected to violence
including rape, beating, threats and harassment. In addition, testimony
concerning numerous incidents of violence against women has been gathered by
several fact-finding teams investigating events that occurred in March as well
as November. Anuradha Talwar, an activist who was part of the first fact-finding
team which reached Nandigram on 16 November, in a deposition submitted to the
delegation, said in Satangabari village alone, local residents informed them
that at least seven women had been raped. ²¹In
one case, a woman said that she was beaten and her four-month-old son was
snatched and flung on the floor. Another woman said that though she was
pregnant, she was beaten until she bled. ²²

The
delegation questioned officials of the Government of West Bengal and the state
police about their efforts to investigate and prosecute violence against women.
They found that very few incidents had been reported to the police and there
were contradictory accounts from the different police forces as to exactly how
many complaints of rape had been filed.

CRPF
Deputy Inspector-General (DIG) Alok Raj stated that five cases of rape were
registered at Nandigram including three after the November violence. ²³As
against this, the Officer-in-Charge, Nandigram police station said only two
complaints of rape had been filed in the area. ²⁴

The
Chief Secretary of West Bengal told the delegation that the authorities were
taking the allegations of rape very seriously: "The accused generally belong to
either political party. We have taken the cases of the women away from the local
police. These cases are now being enquired by the Criminal Investigation
Department of the State Police (CID)." ²⁵

However,
the delegation is concerned that these words have not so far been translated
into action. In each of the cases given by the CRPF, some of the perpetrators
were named. ²⁶Yet,
none of these names figured among the list of persons arrested so far. A number
of local residents informed the delegation that the offenders were operating
with impunity, taunting the people, forcing them to shout slogans in support of
CPI-M, or attend CPI-M party meetings

Accounts
of both officials and villagers relating to violence against women agreed that
the victims were either relatives or sympathisers of BUPC, and named the
perpetrators as groups of armed supporters of the CPI-M.

The
delegation was told that at least seven women from Nandigram have been admitted
to the Government Hospital at Tamluk.. Two of them had been shot at, four were
beaten and one was raped. Several others were admitted to hospitals closer to
Nandigram.

The
delegation met two women ²⁷who
both said they had been raped by several persons during the violence in
November. Among the rapists were men whom they knew and could recognize.
Although they had named these men when they made their complaints, three weeks
later, the police had not made any arrests. The women said they were too
frightened to return home.

One
of them, Akhreja Bibi, was still at the Tamluk hospital. She said that several
men burst into her home in the middle of the night on 8 November. "I tried to
run away but they caught me and beat me up. They raped my daughters in front of
me and then they raped me." Akhreja Bibi's daughters, Ansura, 16, and Mansura,
14, are still among those missing from Nandigram. When the delegation asked
about them at the Nandigram police station, the Officer-in-Charge said there was
news that the girls had joined a circus at Howrah, Kolkata. ²⁸

The
delegation also met Niyoti Patra, a BUPC supporter, who said she was also raped
by several persons; she said she could not return home. "I know those men. They
came to my house and asked me to join a meeting," she said. "When I refused they
came inside and abused me. Then they raped me. There were three men. They were
my neighbours. I am frightened. I have named them in my police report. Now they
will punish me again." She has since been staying at the Nandigram school relief
camp.

Roshomoi
Das Adhikari, a woman in her 80s and mother of a prominent BUPC leader, Swadesh
Das Adhikari, was beaten with rifle butts by three persons she could recognise
as "CPI-M people". She said she was alone at home on 7 November. Her son and
most of the villagers had already fled from the area. Three men burst into her
house and started throwing things around. "I ran out into the courtyard shouting
for help. Two men with big guns were standing there. They started beating and
kicking me. They tore at my sari, slapped me, pulled my hair and cursed me.
Meanwhile, the others had set fire to my house. As they left they threatened me
and told me that they would kill my son. I just lay there bleeding." ²⁹She
also was able to name the CPI-M supporters.

Another
woman, wife of a prominent BUPC member, said her home had been looted and burnt.
Living in a relief camp, she said that when she returned to harvest the paddy,
CPI-M supporters shouted abuses and threatened sexual violence. She was still in
Nandigram school relief camp when the delegation met her, terrified because the
district administration wanted to shut the camp and send her home. "I cannot
describe the language they used. They told me, 'The CRPF will leave. Then we
will come find you. We will chop off your head and kill your husband'." ³⁰

Several
women who returned to their homes after the end of this period of violence, said
that threats of sexual violence were made against them if they did not support
the CPI-M. One woman said that she was forced to attend a party rally on 28
November because she was warned that she would otherwise be stripped in public
and then raped along with her daughters. ³¹Mahamaya
Das Adhikari said that she went back to her village on 26 November but had to
return to the camp a day later because her parents were threatened by CPI-M
supporters. They were told that either their daughter had to publicly pledge her
support to the CPI-M or not bother to return. ³²

Threats
of violence have continued even after those who were displaced returned to their
villages. CPI-M supporters are in "effective control" of most of the villages in
Nandigram, and in some areas, particularly former BUPC strongholds like
Satengbari, they have reportedly threatened women saying "We'll come back at
night – light your lamps and wait for us with open doors. Send your men away,
we'll come back to you at night." ³³

From
the above accounts, it appears that there has been a deliberate pattern of
gender based violence directed against women residents of Nandigram who were
left behind as local male residents fled the advancing CPI-M supporters. The
violence was directed against those women who were at the forefront of the
protest against forced eviction and were unwilling to give up their homes and
lands. Also, the delegation was informed by local residents that many women had
refused to file police reports as they were still afraid of the consequences if
they filed complaints with the police and were also unwilling to risk social
censure associated with rape.

3.
Key areas of concern

a.
Due diligence:

Immediately
after the violence, the Government of West Bengal defended the violence by the
armed supporters of the CPI-M, and blamed the BUPC for the blockade and the
subsequent violence. In media briefings Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee
claimed that the protesters had been "paid back in the same coin" and that his
party was both "legally and morally correct" to "recapture" Nandigram, ³⁴a
comment which he apparently retracted three weeks later while admitting that the
Nandigram events amounted to a "political and administrative failure." ³⁵Later,
on 26 December 2007, he visited Nandigram to express regret for the violence,
according to reports. ³⁶

East
Medinipore District Magistrate Anoop Kumar Agrawal informed the delegation
members that, after the written notification for withdrawal of the SEZ notice
was issued to him on 19 March 2007, he had held meetings with the BUPC and the
other parties to resolve the issue; however, by this time, the BUPC appeared to
have lost confidence in the administration. ³⁷As
a BUPC activist, Sudhin Bijoli, put it "The Chief Minister may have said that he
would not force us to leave, but he was saying so many things and there was
nothing in writing. How could we trust him?" ³⁸

West
Bengal Chief Secretary Amit Kiran Deb told the delegation that "we could not
create an atmosphere of confidence … We failed to persuade the people to allow
the police to enter. They saw the police as partisan and against them." ³⁹

Amnesty
International is concerned by officials' apparent readiness to accept this lack
of confidence in the police and by the failure of the state authorities to take
proactive steps to rectify it. The manner in which the Government of West Bengal
failed to take positive action to address the issue suggests that the government
was acquiescent in the human rights abuses by the armed supporters of the CPI-M
during the November violence.

Amnesty
International opposes human rights abuses whoever commits them and regardless of
the cause espoused by the perpetrators. States have a responsibility to respect
the human rights of all individuals within their jurisdiction – that is, not to
commit human rights violations or to permit their officials to do so. They also
have a responsibility to exercise due diligence to protect all individuals
within their jurisdiction against human rights abuses by non-state actors by
ensuring the maintenance of public order and security by state law enforcement
agents authorised to do so and acting in compliance with international human
rights standards on law enforcement, and by preventing, stopping and punishing
human rights abuses by non-state actors.

Amnesty
International is concerned that in this instance the state authorities have not
fulfilled their responsibility to exercise due diligence to protect human
rights. The recent failure to ensure an effective police presence to maintain
law and order permitted, or even encouraged organized groups of armed supporters
of the ruling party to step in to quell the protests by the BUPC, instead of the
state exercising its responsibility to deal with them lawfully by effective,
impartial and proportionate law enforcement measures. Amnesty International is
also concerned that that state has not taken adequate measures to ensure that
the population whose livelihood will be affected by the development of the SEZ
is protected against forced eviction, by being ensured their rights to
information, adequate consultation, and just and adequate reparation including
resettlement in adequate alternative accommodation.

b.
Justice for the victims:

In
Nandigram, there has been a general failure on the part of the authorities to
ensure progress in investigations into earlier violence in January and March
2007. It is to be noted that no departmental or disciplinary action has been
initiated against any administrative or police official for despite loss of life
and property in the area. The Kolkata High Court, on response appeal filed by
the APDR, the Paschimbanga Khet Mazdoor Samity (PBKMS) and other
organisations, ordered an investigation by the CBI into the violent
confrontations of 14 March when police used excessive force and fired on
demonstrators. The CBI's preliminary report named at least ten CPI-M supporters
– who were later released by the state police – as accused persons. The
Government of West Bengal obtained a stay on this investigation. However
investigations were finally re-instated on 16 November and the CBI commenced its
investigations into the 14 March violence on the basis of its preliminary report
of 24 March. The CBI, which submitted an interim report to the Kolkata High
Court on 17 December, has been directed by the High Court to file its final
report by 15 February 2008. ⁴⁰As
per interim report, the CBI is reported to have filed four new cases against
several CPI-M supporters, including a case of sexual assault, bringing the total
number of cases against the CPI-M supporters to seven. ⁴¹Even
as the CBI was also inquiring into the allegation whether the state police was
aware that the CPI-M supporters fired, along with them, on the protestors, the
Government of West Bengal has successfully obtained a stay, from the Supreme
Court of India, on the filing of charges against state police officials found
responsible for the 14 March police firing. ⁴².

Chief
Secretary Amit Kiran Deb informed the delegation that the Government of West
Bengal had allocated funds for compensation of the victims of the 14 March
violence as per the Kolkata high court order and that this was being
distributed. However, the District Magistrate informed the delegation that he
had received no formal notification nor had funds been released for
disbursement. ⁴³On
31 December 2007, the compensation amounts were finally paid to 13 of the 14
victims of the 14 March police firing, according to reports. ⁴⁴

The
Kolkata High Court, in a judgment delivered on 16 November described the police
firing on demonstrators on 14 March as unconstitutional and illegal.

Amnesty
International believes that the general impunity enjoyed by perpetrators of
human rights abuses in Nandigram since January 2007 was a key contributing
factor to the widespread abuses committed there since 6 November.

The
CRPF was finally deployed on 12 November, and although this brought an end to
overt violence, threats and intimidation continued, putting at risk the lives
and safety of the local inhabitants. There has been very little sign of effort
to arrest perpetrators, who have allegedly been threatening BUPC supporters
against filing complaints, demanding their attendance at CPI-M party meetings
and suggesting that they admit to looting and burning their own homes. ⁴⁵

CRPF
DIG Alok Raj expressed to the delegation his view that the state police force
personnel did not appear to be interested in arresting the perpetrators and were
interfering in the CRPF's operations. The CRPF was given a list of 180 people
against whom there are registered cases of murder. But those arrested by the
CRPF have all been released by the state police. Alok Raj said, on 21 November,
he had sent an official notice to the Government of West Bengal, stating that a
complete list of persons wanted in connection with offences in Nandigram was yet
to be submitted by the state police and that if those arrested by the CRPF were
subsequently released by the state police, it "will not allow normalcy to return
in the area." ⁴⁶

Amnesty
International, while noting that the Government of West Bengal has ordered
inquiries as a result of the unearthing of bodies at Nandigram this month,
points out that the Government has not so far taken any steps to establish the
whereabouts of all those who have been missing from Nandigram since 6 November.

The
Constitution of India clearly provides, in Article 32, for constitutional
remedies when fundamental rights appear to have been violated, as in the case of
the abuses committed during the violence in Nandigram.

Under
international human rights standards states have a responsibility to take
apporopriate legislative, administrative and other measures to prevent
violations and, where they occur, to investigate them effectively, promptly,
thoroughly and impartially and where appropriate to take action against those
alleged to be responsible. They should also ensure that victims have equal and
effective access to justice, and provide them with effective remedies, including
full and effective reparation. Reparation should include restitution,
compensation for economically assessable damage, rehabilitation, satisfaction –
including public acknowledgement of the facts and sanctions against those
responsible – and guarantees of non-repetition. ⁴⁷

In
particular, the obligation of states to conduct prompt, thorough, effective and
impartial investigations into killings and other human rights abuses is also
provided in international human rights law, including Article 2(3) of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by India in 1979.
In its General Comment on Article 2 the Human Rights Committee, the expert body
charged with overseeing the implementation of this Covenant, has stated, among
other things:

"There
may be circumstances in which a failure to ensure Covenant rights as required by
article 2 would give rise to violations by States Parties of those rights, as a
result of States Parties' permitting or failing to take appropriate measures or
to exercise due diligence to prevent, punish, investigate or redress the harm
caused by such acts by private persons or entities. States are reminded of the
interrelationship between the positive obligations imposed under article 2 and
the need to provide effective remedies in the event of breach under article 2,
paragraph 3 ." ⁴⁸

Amnesty
International urges the West Bengal authorities to ensure that the CBI
investigations into the 14 March demonstration are not obstructed any further,
and that all incidents of human rights abuses in the context of the violence
since early 2007 are thoroughly investigated and the suspected perpetrators
brought to justice.

In
addition, Amnesty International urges the Government of West Bengal to urgently
set up an independent and impartial inquiry into the violence at Nandigram since
early 2007 including the violence since 6 November. Such an inquiry should
examine broader issues than criminal responsibility, such as systemic factors,
procedural deficiences, contextual factors leading to the violence, and
accountability of the state authorities for failures to provide effective
protection.

Such
an inquiry should in particular include an investigation into disappearances of
persons, illegal possession of weapons by all non-state actors at Nandigram and
an assessment of the impact and extent of violence against women at Nandigram.
⁴⁹In
view of the fact that the Government of West Bengal and different state agencies
have been implicated in responsibility for the abuses due to the manner in which
they dealt or failed to deal with the violence at Nandigram, there is a need for
the inquiry to be carried out by an independent and impartial body . The
activities of law enforcement agencies during the violence should also be one of
the objects of the inquiry. If the inquiry obtains information indicating that
identified individuals or officials may have been responsible for committing,
ordering, encouraging or permitting human rights abuses, that information should
be passed to the relevant criminal investigation or prosecution bodies.
Provisions of immunity should not be allowed to shield those named as
responsible for such acts of omission and commission.

The
findings of the inquiry should be promptly made public.

c.
Reparation and protection of the rights of all internally displaced people
(IDPs):

West
Bengal Chief Secretary, Amit Kiran Deb, informed the delegation that
humanitarian assistance, including the provision of rice, cash payments and
medical care was being provided by the authorities. In addition, Rs. 7 million,
as compensation to the victims of the 6 November violence, has been released
from the Chief Minister's Relief Fund ⁵⁰in
order to compensate for the loss of homes and other property in the violence.

At
least two relief camps were functioning at Nandigram for those displaced since
violence began in January 2007. However, neither of these camps were run by the
state nor has the state carried out a survey to establish the extent of damage
to property.

One
relief camp (shivir) is located at the Brij Mohan Tiwari Siksha Niketan
in Nandigram Block-I town, and at its height housed around 3,000 to 4,000
persons. Following the violence since 6 November, a fresh influx of local
residents had arrived in the camp. However, by 29 November the number of persons
housed in the camp had dwindled to around 250, the reason being that a large
number of displaced persons had left the camp to stay with relatives and
friends. ⁵¹

The
delegation found that the camp was being run on limited resources by the
Nandigram Bazaar Committee, Bharat Sevashram, a non-governmental
organisation (NGO), and a few other NGOs which had supplied rice, other
essential food items and blankets. TMC leaders also contributed relief materials
to the camp. Medical services are confined to the voluntary services of local
doctors.

The
second camp was located at a high school at Khejuri and was run by CPI-M party
workers who provide some essential services. Most of the villagers, reportedly
numbering 1,500, who supported CPI-M had taken refuge in this camp in the wake
of the BUPC blockade in January 2007. Towards the end of December, the camp was
reported to be hosting around 750 people. The delegation was able to interview
several local residents who returned home from this camp after the November 2007
violence. ⁵²

Amnesty
International is concerned that the Government of West Bengal has not taken the
necessary concrete steps to ensure that all persons under its jurisdiction are
protected from forced eviction and displacement, and that all those forcibly
displaced during the violence are ensured at the very least minimum essential
levels of food, shelter, water and sanitation, health care and education, as
well as their right to voluntary return or resettlement, and reintegration.

Amnesty
International is concerned that not all those displaced have access to essential
services such as adequate food, water, shelter, and medical services.

There
is a similar need to ensure access to justice and adequate reparations without
discrimination for all of those who were forcibly displaced as well as those who
suffered other human rights abuses.

The
Government of West Bengal is responsible to ensure the protection of all
internally displaced persons within its jurisdiction. This duty arises inter
alia from India's Constitution, which guarantees to everyone in India the right
to the protection of life and personal liberty (Article 21) (which Indian courts
have consistently interpreted to include the right to access the minimum
essential levels of food, shelter, and other requirements to live with dignity)
and the equality of all persons before the law (Article 14).

The
duty of the state to protect the rights of all IDPs is reflected in the UN
Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (the Guiding Principles) ⁵³
which clearly affirm, in Principle 3(1), that "national authorities have the
primary duty and responsibility to provide protection and humanitarian
assistance to internally displaced persons within their jurisdiction." The state
also has a duty under its international human rights obligations, including
under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to
provide essential services to all IDPs without discrimination. This is reflected
in article 18(2) of the Guiding Principles, which state that:

"At
the minimum, regardless of the circumstances, and without discrimination,
competent authorities shall provide internally displaced persons with and ensure
safe access to:

(a)
Essential food and potable water;

(b)
Basic shelter and housing;

(c)
Appropriate clothing; and

(d)
Essential medical services and sanitation."

Amnesty
International emphasises the right of all IDPs to voluntary return to their
homes or places of habitual residence or resettlement, and reintegration and
restitution of their homes and other property, and calls upon the Government of
West Bengal to ensure a safe and dignified environment for their return. The
organization believes that this will not be achieved unless there is a clear
political will on the part of the authorities to put an end to the atmosphere of
violence in Nandigram. Amnesty International is concerned that displaced persons
who wish to return to their homes will be unable or unwilling to return if those
responsible for human rights abuses against them during the violence remain at
large, sometimes in positions of authority.

Amnesty
International urges the Government of West Bengal that all those responsible for
human rights abuses are brought promptly to justice, and to ensure full
reparations for victims including adequate compensation delivered promptly and
on a non-discriminatory basis.

Amnesty
International also urges the Government of West Bengal and the Government of
India to ensure that those returning home at Nandigram, irrespective of their
political affiliation, are able to return to their homes or places of habitual
residence or resettlement, voluntarily and in safety and dignity. They should
also be guaranteed their right to reintegration and restitution of their homes
and other property, and where this is not possible to adequate compensation, In
order for this to happen, there should be the continued and effective deployment
of adequate CRPF personnel. ⁵⁴

4.
Recommendations:

Amnesty
International urges the Government of West Bengal to:

·        
Ensure
that all incidents of human rights abuses in the context of the violence since
early 2007 are thoroughly investigated and that the suspected perpetrators,
whether or not they are officials and regardless of their political affiliation,
are brought promptly to justice:

·        
Establish
an independent and impartial inquiry into all the violent incidents at Nandigram
this year including the violence since 6 November. Such an inquiry should
include an investigation into disappearances of persons, illegal possession of
weapons by all non-state actors at Nandigram and an assessment of the impact and
extent of violence against women at Nandigram. The findings of the inquiry
should be made public.:

·        
Ensure
that all those displaced have access, without discrimination, to essential
services such as adequate food, water, shelter, and medical
assistance:

·        
Put
in place a policy of adequate reparation, including restitution, compensation
and guarantees of non-repetition.

Amnesty
International urges the Government of West Bengal and the Government of India
to:

·        
Ensure
that those returning to their homes or places of habitual residence in
Nandigram, irrespective of their political affiliation, are able to return to
their homes or places of habitual residence, voluntarily and in safety and
dignity. They should also be guaranteed their right to reintegration and
restitution of their homes and other property, and where this is not possible to
adequate compensation and resettlement. In order for this to happen, there
should be a continued and effective deployment of adequate CRPF personnel:

·        
Ensure
that unlawful methods are not used, or allowed to be used, to quell protests
against forced eviction or displacement and ensure that the human rights of all
those protesting against forced eviction or displacement are fully protected;

·        
Protect
the rights of the affected communities to information, consultation,
participation, and freedom from forced eviction (which requires ensuring their
rights to information, adequate consultation, and just and adequate reparation,
including resettlement in adequate alternative accommodation.

1
Since
2005, India has been promoting SEZs across the country. The policy of acquiring
land for such industrial projects in several states has sparked protests from
local communities fearing forced displacement and threats to their sustainable
livelihood.

2
Paschimbanga
Khet Majoor Samity Report (PBKMS), People's Uprising against Forced Land
Acquisition: All disquiet on the Nandigram front, 22-24 January 2007;
Association for Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR), PBKMS and Manabidhikar
Suraksha Mancha (MASUM), Report of Investigation Into Nandigram Mass
Killings, 23 March 2007; Sramajibi Swastha Udyog, People's Health and
Janaswastha Swadikar Mancha, Report of the Medical Team from Nandigram, 5
April 2007; Report of All India Independent Fact-finding Team on Nandigram
Massacre , 10 April 2007; All India Citizens' Initiative, Report of the
People's Tribunal on Nandigram, 26-28 May 2007.

3
Amnesty
International public statements: India: Deaths in West Bengal during protest
against new industrial project, AI Index: ASA 20/004/2007, 11 January 2007;
India: Deaths in West Bengal due to police firing during protests
against new industrial project , AI Index: ASA 20/008/2007, 15 March 2007;
Amnesty International public statement: India: Need for effective
investigations and prosecutions as political violence continues in West
Bengal, AI Index: ASA 20/020/2007, 9 November 2007. .

4
Press
release of West Bengal Governor, Kolkata, 9 November 2007, cited in Time
of India, 10 November 2007.

5
NHRC
Chairperson's r eply to Members of the
Parliament on Nandigram, 21 November 2007.

6
Profile
of a hooded hunter, The Telegraph, 18 November 2007.

7
Interview
with East Medinipore District Magistrate Anoop Kumar Agrawal, Tamluk, 29
November 2007; Interview with Officer-in-Charge, Nandigram police station,
Sub-Inspector Champak Chowdhary, 29 November 2007.

8
Interview
with East Medinipore District Superintendent of Police Satya Prakash Panda,
Nandigram, 29 November 2007.

9
Interview
with East Medinipore District Superintendent of Police Satya Prakash Panda,
Nandigram, 29 November 2007.

10
Buddhadeb
accuses Centre of delaying CRPF deployment, Times of India, 13 November
2007.

11
Prime
Minister concerned over violence in Nandigram, Daily News and Analysis, 5
November 2007.

12
Centre
did not delay deployment of CRPF in Nandigram, Dailyindia.com, 16 November,
2007.

13
Report
on Nandigram Events, Based on visit by social activists and intellectuals, 8-15
November 2007, p. 2-4.

14
Interview
with West Bengal Director-General of Police Anup Bhushan Vohra, Kolkata, 30
November 2007.

15
Five
half-burnt bodies found near Nandigram, Times of India, 5 December
2007.

16
CID
to probe Nandigram graves, Times of India, 7 December 2007.

17
Communication
received from APDR, Kolkata, 8 November 2007.

18
More
bones found in Nandigram, Daily News and Analysis, 8 December
2007.

19
Body
with bullet holes dug out: Wife of BUPC supporter says shirt belonged to her
husband, The Telegraph, 13 December 2007.

20
More
claimants to the body from grave, The Telegraph, 14 December
2007.

21
Report
on Nandigram events based on visit by social activists and intellectuals,
8-15 November 2007, p. 12.

22
Report
on Nandigram Events, Based on visit by social activists and intellectuals,
8-15 November 2007, p. 12.

23
Interview
with CRPF DIG Alok Raj, 29 November 2007.

24
Interview
with Officer-in-Charge, Nandigram police station, Sub-Inspector Champak
Chowdhary, 29 November 2007. Of the two victims, one is at the Government
Hospital at the District headquarters, Tamluk, while the other is at a relief
camp.

25
Interview
with West Bengal Chief Secretary Amit Kiran Deb, 30 November
2007.

26
The
names of perpetrators in the five rape cases given by CRPF DIG Alok
Raj:

A.
Case No 316/07 dated 22 November 2007 under sections 448/363/361/380/325/354/506

1.      
Mir
Aahsaan s/o Mir Masi Mir

2.      
Mir
Barik s/o Abu Bakar

3.      
Mir
Ilyass s/o Mir Kadir

4.      
Mir
Kalu s/o Mir Akram

5.      
Mir
Bachhu s/o Mir Akram

6.      
Maha
Aditya Das s/o Sadanand Jha

7.      
Babun
Dass s/o Nishikanta

8.      
Arubindo
Mandal s/o Rishiesh

B.
Case No 192/07/dated 11 November 2007 under IPC 376

1.      
Kallu
s/o Ahsaan

2.      
Barrick
s/o Abdul Rafe

3.      
Bachhu

C.
Case No. 30/07 dated 4 March 2007 under sections 448/376 (2)

1.      
Sri
Hari Samantra s/o Vijay Kalicharan

D.
Case No 260/07 dated 17 November 2007 under sections 376 (2)/506

1.      
Kalipara
Ganadass s/o Sudarshan

2.      
Sagar
Das s/o Lal Mohan

E.
Case No 47/07/19 March 2007 under sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 323, 326, 376,
511 IPC

1.      
Badal
Gara Das s/o Netri

2.      
Sunil
Das s/o Kalachand

3.      
Sudarshan
Gora Das s/o Netai

4.      
Gopal
Garu Das s/o Sudarshan

5.      
Khorna
Rai Das wife of Badal

6.      
Chargan
Shil s/o of Srini Dash

27
Except
in two cases which were registered by the police and whose names have been
widely reported in the Indian media, this report is withholding the identity of
rape victims.

28
Interview
with Officer-in-Charge, Nandigram police station, Sub-Inspector Champak
Chowdhary, 29 November 2007.

29
Interview
with Roshomoi Das Adhikary of Adhikaripara, Gokulnagar, 29 November
2007.

30
Interview
with a victim in Nandigram, name withheld, 28 November 2007.

31
Interview
with a victim in Nandigram relief camp, name withheld, 28 November
2007.

32
Interview
with Mahamaya Das Adhikary of Adhikaripara, Gokulnagar, at Nandigram relief
camp, 28 November 2007.

33
Interview
with a victim at the Government Hospital, Tamluk, 28 November
2007.

34
Buddhadeb
accuses Centre of delaying CRPF deployment, Times of India, 13 November
2007.

35
"I
regret saying rivals paid back on the same coin": Buddhadeb, Hindustan
Times, 4 December 2007.

36
This
time Buddha goes to Nandigram to say sorry, Indian Express, 27 December
2007. Later, according to reports, the Chief Minister announced that the
Government of West Bengal has sent a fresh proposal to relocate the project at
Nayachar island, also near Haldia and the BUPC has once again opposed it. See:
Bengal government sends proposal on PCPIR to Centre, The Hindu, 4 January
2008 & BUPC to oppose chemical hub at Nayachar, Economic Times, 7
January 2008.

37
Interview
with East Medinipore District Magistrate Anoop Kumar Agrawal, Tamluk, 29
November 2007.

38
Interview
with Sudhin Bijoli, Nandigram, 28 November 2007.

39
Interview
with West Bengal Chief Secretary Amit Kiran Deb, Kolkata, 30 November
2007.

40
Nandigram:
court directs CBI to file report by 15 February, The Hindu, 17 December
2007.

41
Nandigram:
CBI files four new cases, Times of India, 19 December 2007.

42
Nandigram:
CBI restrained from filing cases against police, The Hindu, 14 December
2007.

43
Interview
with West Bengal Chief Secretary Amit Kiran Deb, Kolkata, 30 November 2007;
Interview with East Medinipore District Magistrate, Anoop Kumar Agrawal,
Tamluk, 29 November 2007.

44
Compensation
paid to Nandigram victims, Hindustan Times, 31 December 2007.

45
Interview
with villagers, Adhikari pada, 29 November 2007.

46
Interview
with CRPF DIG Alok Raj, Khejuri, 29 November 2007.

47
These
principles are set out in numerous human rights instruments as well as the
Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for
Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious
Violations of International Humanitarian Law , adopted by UN General
Assembly Resolution 60/147 of 16 December 2005.

48
Human
Rights Committee, General Comment No. 31 on Article 2 of the Covenant: The
Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the
Covenant, UN Doc. CCPR/C/74/CRP.4/Rev.6, 21 April 2004, para. 8.

49
Amnesty
International is aware that a consultation paper regarding the protection of the
rights of witnesses was drafted in 2004 by India's Law Commission and
subsequently submitted to the Government of India. Despite this initiative, the
Government of India is yet to introduce a witness protection scheme. Amnesty
International fears that in absence of a witness protection scheme and against a
context in which police are feared to have colluded with CPI -M supporters in
attacks against women in Nandigram and where a fear of security and safety
remain, that victims and witnesses may refrain from registering First
Information Reports or from pursuing cases through the criminal justice system.

50
This
contradicts what the East Medinipore District Magistrate informed the delegation
when it met him on 28 November. He had said that no money has been released;
only an announcement for it has been made to the media by the Chief Secretary.

51
Delegation's
visit to Brij Mohan Tiwari Siksha Niketan relief camp in Nandigram, 28
November 2007.

52
According
to reports, West Bengal Home Secretary P. R. Roy has stated that the camps at
Nandigram were empty and all the inmates had left them while admitting that some
of the inmates might have gone to stay with their relatives. See All Inmates in
Nandigram relief camps have left: WB government, Times of India, 3
January 2008.

53
UN
Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, UN Document
E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, 11 February 1998.

54
After
the delegation's visit, Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee was reported to
have informed the state assembly that the Government of West Bengal was looking
into complaints received from some CPI-M supporters in Nandigram that they were
harassed by the CRPF. See: WB Government looking into CRPF excesses: Buddhadeb,
Times of India, 13 December 2007. Earlier, state Home Secretary P. R. Roy
stated that the CRPF would remain in Nandigram till 12 February 2008. See: CRPF
to stay in Nandigram till February 12: Buddhadeb government, Times of
India, 12 December 2007.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/alfresco_asset/a532d72d-bf9f-11dc-ae79-97a062e1f7a9/asa200012008eng.html