ICRC had told U.S. diplomats that Indian police and paramilitary were beating suspects in Kashmir - cable
NEW DELHI (AlertNet) - The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has defended passing sensitive information about India torturing prisoners to U.S. officials, saying it was "frustrated due to the lack of dialogue" with New Delhi.
The Geneva-based humanitarian organisation helps people affected by insecurity, violence and armed conflict and -- due to its promise of confidentiality and impartiality -- has access to some of the world's most volatile hot spots.
But according to a 2005 cable, released by WikiLeaks and published by the Guardian newspaper, the ICRC told American diplomats in New Delhi that it had found systematic prisoner abuse by Indian security forces during detention centre visits in Kashmir from 2002 and 2004.
The cable said the ICRC had told U.S. diplomats that Indian police and paramilitary, who are fighting a 20-year insurgency in Kashmir, beat suspects, subjected them to electric currents and tortured them with water in widespread human rights abuses.
"We confirm that a meeting took place between the ICRC and the U.S. embassy in 2005 at a time in which the ICRC was very frustrated due to the lack of dialogue with the Indian authorities," Alexis Heeb, the ICRC's spokesman in New Delhi, told AlertNet.
"The ICRC works always in a confidential way with the authorities. However, in specific instances, when the dialogue is blocked for different reasons, we may change our strategy."
Among 1,500 detainees that the ICRC staff met, more than half reported "ill-treatment", the cable reported. Of the 852 cases recorded, 171 detainees said they had been beaten, while the rest said they had been subjected to one or more of six forms of torture.
The cable revealed the ICRC had raised the issue of prisoner abuse with the Indian government for more than a decade, but because the practice continued, "it is forced to conclude that the government of India condones torture".
"CONFIDENTIALITY NOT UNCONDITIONAL"
Indian officials have responded saying India is a democratic nation which adheres to the rule of law, adding in a statement that authorities "have never shied away from an open and candid discussion on such issues when raised by international friends and partners."
But some aid workers have questioned the actions of the ICRC saying that the organisation may be seen to have breached the trust of the Indian government by speaking to another party.
Involving the Americans in an internal Indian matter, they feared, could have repercussions on ICRC operations and possibly result in less access to prisoners.
Other observers said they were concerned that governments -- which do not want international aid agencies working in a sensitive area -- may use this as an excuse to restrict the activities of the ICRC or other agencies.
But Heeb said involving a third party was an official procedure clearly spelt out in the organisation's modes of action, adding that the Indian authorities would have been aware that it was divulging information to another party.
"Confidentiality is not unconditional," said Heeb. "When dialogue breaks down, we use various strategies such as the mobilisation of specific stakeholders who may help us in humanitarian diplomacy."
"This is usually one of the last steps we take before we decide to publically denounce the findings that we have from the field."
ICRC officials said they have had discussions with the Indian government about the WikiLeaks disclosure, adding that they have not received any signals that their work in the country will be affected.
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
