THE issue of alleged collective punishments carried out by the security forces against relatives of suspected militants and extrajudicial killings in the conflict areas especially Swat has once again been in the limelight. While a writ petition challenging these illegal practices has been pending before the Peshawar High Court, a horrifying video has surfaced purportedly showing some security personnel killing six blindfolded and bound persons.The veracity of the controversial video is yet to be proved, but the spokesman of ISPR (Inter Services Public Relations), Major General Athar Abbas told different foreign newspapers and agencies that it was fabricated. The national print and electronic media mostly ignored the video, which surfaced on internet few days ago, and it was given coverage by some foreign newspapers and wire services.

It is not clear where and when the video was filmed and who were the killed persons who are apparently young. Around a year ago another video had surfaced, which was apparently filmed at a police station. That video showed an army officer in uniform interrogating some suspects and on his order some of his subordinates were shown torturing the suspects while severely kicking, slapping and flogging them.

Major Gen Ather Abbas had also challenged the veracity of that video and stated that an inquiry had been ordered in that regard. It is not clear whether any inquiry was conducted and, if conducted, what was the outcome of that inquiry.

Last week the high court put on notice the attorney general for Pakistan in a writ petition filed by the Islamic lawyers Movement, challenging the alleged extrajudicial killings as well as expulsion of families of suspected militants from Swat and confining them at a deserted Afghan refugee camp in Malakand.

From time to time different national and international human rights organisations have voiced concerns about alleged violations of human rights as well as international humanitarian law in the conflict zones. The Human Rights Watch had in July last released reports about extrajudicial killings in Swat as well as collective punishment against relatives of suspected militants by the security forces.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan has also raised voice through different reports on the same issue. The most harrowing reports were of dead bodies strewn upside down by the military with notes attached to the bodies warning that anyone supporting the Taliban will meet the same fate.

The Refugees International has early this year in one of its reports called upon the US government to take all necessary steps to ensure that US assistance is not provided to Pakistani military units credibly alleged to have committed gross human rights violations.

The famous Leahy Amendment, initially incorporated in the US Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs Appropriation Act, 1998, prohibit US assistance to military units in such like cases. Section 570 of the said law provides that the law “Prohibits the use of funds for the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State believes they have committed gross violations of human rights, unless the Secretary reports to the Committees on Appropriations that such country is taking steps to bring the responsible persons to justice.”

The said amendment was initially only applicable to State Department International Narcotics Control Program, but later on the scope of the amendment was expanded to various other fields including security assistance programme.

If the allegations against the security forces were proven correct, it would place the US government under pressure to suspend the military assistance to Pakistan under the Leahy Amendment.

These alleged violations by the security apparatus are not only against the Constitution of Pakistan, but also of different international conventions. Legal experts said that the Protocol No. II Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, relating to a non-international armed conflict, places various restrictions on the warring groups including the security personnel.

The said protocol provides certain fundamental guarantees which have to be followed during an internal conflict. Article 4(1) of the protocol makes it binding that all persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person, honour and convictions and religious practices. They shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction.

Furthermore, against the said persons certain acts are prohibited including: violence to the life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular murder as well as cruel treatment such as torture, mutilation or any form of corporal punishment.

Moreover, Article 3 common to the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 provides that in armed conflict not of an international character each party to the conflict should be bound to follow certain restrictions. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those disabled by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely.

Various acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time with respect to the said persons, including: violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognised as indispensable by civilised peoples.

It is now widely believed that while the militants have no respect for the international convention, the security forces have also been acting in the same manner as perhaps they want to pay back the militants in the same coin.