Monitoring Desk: Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) has released a report titled “Investigation into extra-judicial killings in Mari Jalbani village near Sakrand, Sindh—An HRCP fact-finding report”.
The report has documented the incident of September 28, 2023, that took place between Rangers/other law enforcement agencies and local villagers resulting in the death of four locals and injuries to four personnel of law enforcement agencies in Mari Jalbani Sakrand, Sindh.
HRCP on October 2, 2023, sent a mission comprising HRCP co-chair Asad Iqbal Butt, Sindh vice-chair Qazi Khizar Habib, council members Saeed Baloch and Saleem Jarwar, program advisor Imdad Chandio, human rights activist Taj Joyo, Ghufrana Arain and Ali Ousat to Mari Jalbani village where this unfortunate incident took place.
This four-page report (total pages 9 as 5 pages are documents like FIR/photos etc) claims in its title that the death of four villagers was “Extra-judicial murder”. The detailed review of documents/report itself indicates that deceased villagers were gun-downed in a shootout that also resulted in injuries of several personnel of Rangers/law enforcement agencies.
Circumstances provided by the HRCP confirmed that there was an attack on LEAs by the villagers resulting in a firing incident like any other shot-out that can take place when a raiding party of police/LEAs is attacked by criminals/locals etc. Therefore, such a situation cannot be called “extra-judicial murders” even under the given definition of Human Rights organizations. This is called a “situation” and this situation took place in day-light (around 3 pm) and continued for several hours because villagers resisted the arrest of wanted persons who as claimed by law enforcement agencies had been planning for sabotage and the raid was conducted on information and rules were followed by involving local police of the area, by using official vehicles and all personnel were in their uniforms.
HRCP report indicates the operation’s purpose was to, reportedly, apprehend members from a banned militant organization Sindhudesh Revolutionary Army (SRA) in possession of dangerous explosives.
The HRCP report while giving the version of relatives of deceased persons gave a narrative of the locals while the spokesperson of Rangers, according to the HRCP report refused to give his version of the story. The Report also claimed that Sindh Home Minister Brig (retd) Haris refrained from giving an official version to HRCP. However, the report confirmed that the Home Minister at least four days before the mission went to the locality released a statement on 28 September giving his version of the story and claimed that high-profile militants had been killed during the operation. Minister Haris Nawaz also claimed that the incident of the death of villagers took place as an attack on the Rangers, stating that the operation was conducted to apprehend a suicide bomber and that suspects had attacked the team, injuring Rangers personnel.
HRCP Report added that on 29 September, the caretaker Sindh Chief Minister promptly responded by setting up an inquiry committee to investigate the incident. Meanwhile, on 6 October, a petition was filed in the Sindh High Court seeking to establish a judicial commission to probe the incident.
Strangely, the HRCP Report did not include an official version of the head of the inquiry (Commissioner Hyderabad Division). The official version of the incident that came to the surface claimed that Law Enforcing Agencies (LEAs) conducted an Intelligence-Based Operation (IBO) on the confirmation of the presence of a high-profile target who was confirmed through technical (Geo-fencing) and human intelligence gathering while the HRCP report also refrained from highlighting the fact that IBO was conducted in broad daylight, using service color vehicles and all personnel were in uniforms and they carried local police with raiding party so there would be no doubt left that raiding party was comprised of Rangers, Police and other LEAs.
The HRCP Report is too silent how were members of LEAs seriously injured who attacked them and what for?
It is pertinent to mention that Pakistan has been going through a new way of terrorism and LEAs are constantly under attack almost on a daily basis, resulting in the live losses of LEAs personnel. Any attack on official vehicles, or personnel in uniform, backed by local police in daylight can be called nothing but an attack to safeguard wanted terrorists.
Moreover, the interim CM who is a retired Judge of the Supreme Court already (September 29) had constituted an inquiry headed by the Commissioner, therefore HRCP should have been in contact with the head of the inquiry committee for fact gathering but this opportunity was not maintained and the report has a loaded titled of “extra-judicial killing”.
This attack of villagers on LEAs, resulting shoot-out that left four villagers dead raised again the issue of the monopoly of the use of violence that is an official right of the state given by the United Nations to maintain public order and to execute official duty against anti-state elements (criminals/terrorists). Can the state personnel (LEAs) work and apprehend criminals/terrorists if they cannot use this right of the monopoly of the use of violence?
There is another question is “there a possibility of excessive use of power by LEAs while apprehending the wanted alleged terrorists?” This is the core question/issue that the inquiry committee would deal with.
Another issue is the publication of such reports by the national media which is itself full of shortcomings. Can a 1,700-worded report having only interviews of relatives of the deceased and an interview of SSP Shaheed Benazirabad be called a comprehensive and in-depth investigation report that is silent to figure out why villagers attacked raiding party that arrived in broad-daylight in officials’ vehicles of Rangers and Police while wearing uniforms?
Moreover, avoiding meeting the HRCP mission by the Home Minister of Sindh or the spokesperson of Sindh Rangers was not a good idea as the 21st century is the era of information influx where scenarios and challenges change rapidly, and stereotypes fade quicker than ever. The buzz line for the current scenario is “WHO FILLS THE INFORMATION VACUUM FIRST”. In case the hostile group fills it first, the truth can be put under the dust of incorrect information. But if officials fill the vacuum in the first place; the adversary’s challenge is multiplied. The resulting perception (against or in favor) is greatly dependent on this vacuum-filling time frame and the quality of information, theme, or narrative.
