India

Cluster Munition Ban Policy

Last updated: 18 July 2016

Summary: Non-signatory India acknowledges the humanitarian concerns over cluster munitions, but views them as legitimate weapons to be used in accordance with international humanitarian law. India has not articulated its position on accession to the ban convention, but abstained from voting on a UN resolution on the convention in December 2015. India has never attended a meeting of the convention.

India produces and exports cluster munitions and imported them as recently as 2013. India is not known to have used cluster munitions. It has not disclosed information on its stockpiled cluster munitions.

Policy

The Republic of India has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

India has not attended a meeting of the Convention on Cluster Munitions or made a statement articulating its position on acceding to the ban convention. India has acknowledged humanitarian concerns at the “irresponsible use” of cluster munitions, which it views as “legitimate” weapons as long as they are used in accordance with international humanitarian law.[1]

India has long expressed its preference for cluster munitions to be regulated, rather than banned, through the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) to which it is party.[2] In November 2015, India again expressed disappointment at the failure of states to adopt a CCW protocol on cluster munitions in 2011, but did not proposed any further CCW work on the topic.[3] The failure effectively ended the CCW’s work on cluster munitions, leaving the Convention on Cluster Munitions as the sole international instrument dedicated to ending the suffering caused by cluster munitions.

On 7 December 2015, India abstained from the vote on the first UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution on the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which urges states outside the convention to “join as soon as possible.”[4] India did not explain the reasons for its abstention on the non-binding resolution, which 140 states voted for, including many non-signatories.

India did not participate in the Oslo Process that produced the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[5]

India has not participated in any international or regional meetings relating to the convention. It was invited to, but did not attend, the convention’s First Review Conference in Dubrovnik, Croatia in September 2015.

India is not party to the Mine Ban Treaty.

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

India produces and exports cluster munitions and has imported them in the past. The Monitor has not been able to verify any use of cluster munitions by India or obtain detailed information on the stockpile of cluster munitions.

India has produced cluster munitions using ground-delivered artillery projectiles, rockets, and missiles. It is not known to have developed or produced air-dropped cluster munitions.

State-owned India Ordnance Factories advertised in 2006 its capacity to produce for export 130mm and 155mm artillery projectiles containing dual-purpose improved conventional munition (DPICM) submunitions equipped with a self-destruct feature.[6] These ground-delivered cluster munitions were supposed to be produced at Khamaria Ordnance Factory near Jabalpur in Madhya Pradesh as the result of a transfer of production technology from Israel Military Industries, but there are doubts about whether this capacity has been active in recent years.[7] In response to a Right to Information request, a Ministry of Defence official stated that India does not produce 130mm and 155mm artillery containing DPICM submunitions, but acknowledged a 130mm version was being developed.[8]

The Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) of India’s Ministry of Defence has produced a cargo rocket containing antitank/antimaterial submunitions for the 214mm Pinaka multi-barrel rocket launcher system.[9] In June 2015, a DRDO official told media that submunition warheads for the Pinaka system had been tested at a firing range in Pokhran, Rajasthan.[10] Other sources have claimed that warheads containing submunitions were developed for the Agni, Dhanush, and Prithvi ballistic missile systems.[11]

India has imported cluster munitions from the United States (US) and other countries.

The US announced a sale to India in September 2008 of 510 air-delivered CBU-105 Sensor Fuzed Weapons.[12] In December 2010, US arms manufacturer Textron announced that it had been awarded a US$258 million contract to supply India with 512 CBU-105 Sensor Fuzed Weapons.[13] The Indian air force began receiving the weapons in early 2013.[14] In February 2013, Textron displayed the CBU-105 at an arms show in Bangalore, India.[15]

Jane’s Information Group lists India as possessing KMG-U dispensers, as well as BL-755, BLG-66 Belouga, RBK-250-275, and RBK-500 cluster bombs.[16] In 2006, India bought 28 launch units for the Russian-produced 300mm Smerch multi-barrel rocket launchers fitted with dual-purpose and sensor-fuzed submunitions; it was the third export customer for the system.[17]

According to the 2016 NGO report “Worldwide Investments in Cluster Munitions: a shared responsibility,” the State Bank of India is involved in investments in the production of cluster munitions.[18]



[1] Statement of India, Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) Fourth Review Conference, Geneva, 14 November 2011. India has often made similar statements in the past. Statement of India, CCW Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on Cluster Munitions, Geneva, 30 August 2010. Notes by Action on Armed Violence (AOAV); and statement of India, CCW GGE on Cluster Munitions, Geneva, 12 April 2010. Notes by AOAV.

[2] Statement by Amb. Hamid Ali Rao, Permanent Mission of India, Conference on Disarmament, CCW GGE on Cluster Munitions, Geneva, 7 July 2008. He said that “until [cluster munitions] can be replaced by other alternatives which are cost effective and perform the required military tasks, [cluster munitions] will continue to find a place in military armories as both point target as well as area target weapons.”

[3] Statement of India, Convention on Conventional Weapons Meeting of the High Contracting Parties, Geneva, 12 November 2015. See also: statement of India, Convention on Conventional Weapons Meeting of the High Contracting Parties, Geneva, 13 November 2014; and statement of India, Convention on Conventional Weapons Meeting of the High Contracting Parties, Geneva, 14 November 2013.

[4]Implementation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions,” UNGA Resolution 70/54, 7 December 2015.

[5] After the Convention on Cluster Munitions was adopted in May 2008, India sent a representative to a regional meeting on cluster munitions held in Lao PDR in October 2008. For more details on India’s policy and practice regarding cluster munitions through early 2009, see Human Rights Watch and Landmine Action, Banning Cluster Munitions: Government Policy and Practice (Ottawa: Mines Action Canada, May 2009), pp. 208–210.

[6] The 130mm projectile contains 24 submunitions, and the 155mm projectile contains 49 submunitions. See India Ordnance Factories website.

[7]Ordnance Board to produce ‘cargo ammunition’ with Israeli company,” The Hindu (online edition), 2 August 2006.

[8] According to the response, India did not produce any cluster munitions in 2011. Response to Right to Information request submitted by Control Arms Foundation of India from T.J. Konger, Director and Central Public Information Officer, Ordnance Factory Board, Ministry of Defence, 6 June 2012.

[9] Leland S. Ness and Anthony G. Williams, eds., Jane’s Ammunition Handbook 2007–2008 (Surrey, UK: Jane’s Information Group Limited, 2007), p. 715.

[11] Duncan Lennox, ed., Jane’s Strategic Weapons Systems 46 (Surrey, UK: Jane’s Information Group Limited, January 2007), pp. 49–56 and 85–87; and Duncan Lennox, ed., Jane’s Strategic Weapons Systems 42 (Surrey, UK: Jane’s Information Group Limited, January 2005), pp. 85–87.

[12] US Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense, “India: CBU-105 Sensor Fuzed Weapons,” Transmittal No. 08-105, Press Release, 30 September 2008. The US has attached a term to the transfer, in compliance with Public Law 110-161 (26 December 2008), which requires that the submunitions have a 99% or higher reliability rate and stipulates that “the cluster munitions will only be used against clearly defined military targets and will not be used where civilians are known to be present.”

[13] Craig Hoyale, “India signs Sensor Fused Weapon deal,” Flightglobal, 10 December 2010; and Craig Hoyale, “AERO INDIA: Textron launches production of CBU-105 sensor fuzed weapon for India,” Flightglobal, 10 February 2011.

[14] Jay Menon, “IAF To Receive Sensor Fuzed Weapons In 2013,” Aviation Week, 9 November 2012; and “IAF to receive CBU-105 next month,” SP’s Aviation, 4 December 2012.

[15] Photographs from Aero India 2013 sent to Control Arms Foundation of India by a journalist at the event. Email from Binalakshmi Neepram, Director, Control Arms Foundation of India, 6 February 2013.

[16] Robert Hewson, ed., Jane’s Air Launched Weapons, Issue 44 (Surrey, UK: Jane’s Information Group Limited, 2004), p. 840. While there is no information about specific transfers, the manufacturers are the United Kingdom (BL-755), France (BLG-66), and Russia/USSR (RBKs).

[17] “India, Russia sign $500 mn [sic] rocket systems deal,” Indo-Asian News Service (New Delhi), 9 February 2006. Each Smerch rocket can carry five sensor-fuzed submunitions and either 72 or 646 dual-purpose, high explosive submunitions.


Mine Ban Policy

Last updated: 28 November 2013

Mine ban policy overview

Mine Ban Treaty status

State not party

Pro-mine ban UNGA voting record

Abstained on Resolution 67/32 in December 2012, as in previous years

Participation in Mine Ban Treaty meetings

Attended, as an observer, the Twelfth Meeting of States Parties in December 2012

Policy

The Republic of India has not acceded to the Mine Ban Treaty. In November 2012, India reiterated its long-held position by stating, “We support the approach enshrined in Amended Protocol II of the CCW [Convention on Conventional Weapons] which addresses the legitimate defence requirements of states with long borders. However, we are fully committed to the eventual elimination of anti-personnel landmines.”[1]

On 3 December 2012, India abstained from voting on UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 67/32 calling for universalization and full implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty, as it has on similar annual resolutions since 1997. India has previously offered the same explanation each year, stating it “supports the vision of a world free of the threat of anti-personnel mines” and that the “availability of militarily effective alternative technologies that can perform, cost-effectively, the legitimate defensive role of anti-personnel landmines will considerably facilitate the goal of the complete elimination of anti-personnel mines.”[2]

India sent an observer to the Twelfth Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in December 2012, where it stated that “The humanitarian ideals espoused by the Ottawa Convention have universal appeal.”[3] However, India also stated it would continue to address “the humanitarian suffering caused by anti-personnel landmines in consonance with its legitimate national security concerns.”[4] India did not attend the intersessional Standing Committee meetings in May 2013.

India is party to the CCW and its Amended Protocol II on landmines and Protocol V on explosive remnants of war. It submitted its annual Article 13 report for Amended Protocol II.[5]

Production, transfer, and stockpiling

India is one of the few countries still producing antipersonnel mines. India states that all production is authorized and controlled by government agencies.[6] Officials have not responded to a request for updated information on whether it is producing antipersonnel mines since 2011.

During 2010 and into 2011, the Indian Ordnance Factory Board produced M14 and M16 antipersonnel mines. The quantities produced are not known.[7] In 2007–2008, India produced at least five types of mines, including two types of antipersonnel mines (AP NM-14 and AP NM-16) and two types of antivehicle mines (AT ND 1A and AT ND 4D), as well as the APER 1B mine (a type unknown to the Monitor).[8]

India has repeatedly stated that it has had a formal export moratorium of unlimited duration in place since May 1996.[9] It has previously stated that it favors an outright ban on transfer of antipersonnel mines even to States Parties of CCW Amended Protocol II.[10] Five Mine Ban Treaty States Parties have reported Indian-made mines in their stockpiles: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Mauritius, Sudan, and Tanzania. India has previously denied that any transfer of mines to these countries took place.[11]

In 1999, the Monitor estimated that India stockpiled between four and five million antipersonnel mines, one of the world’s largest stockpiles.[12] India has neither confirmed nor denied this estimate. In March 2008, Brigadier Vijay Sharma, former Deputy Director of the Directorate of Military Operations, stated that India does not possess mines that can detonate in the presence of mine detectors and does not possess—nor is it designing—any mine with antihandling characteristics.[13] An address by a military commander to army sappers (engineers), reported by the press in September 2010, stated, “After India became a signatory to a UN convention on landmine [sic], we are compulsorily putting a steel rod measuring a few inches in each mine so that it can be detected during demining operations.”[14]

Use

Government

India’s last major use of antipersonnel mines took place between December 2001 and July 2002, when the Indian Army deployed an estimated two million mines along its northern and western border with Pakistan in Operation Parakram.[15] This was probably the most extensive use of antipersonnel mines anywhere in the world since the Mine Ban Treaty was negotiated and first signed in 1997.

In April 2010, in response to a Right to Information Act (RTI) request, India stated that the army had not laid any mines during 2008 or 2009.[16] Officials did not respond to an updated request regarding any use since 2011. Indian officials have also previously stated on many occasions that “There is no minefield or mined area in any part of India’s interiors” but have acknowledged that “minefields are laid, if required, along the border areas as part of military operations.”[17] However, in past years, injuries from mines planted near military bases within Jammu and Kashmir state have been reported.[18]

Some Indian Army officials have said that infiltration of Kashmiri militants across the Line of Control (LoC) between Pakistani- and Indian-administered sections of Kashmir is the main rationale for mines laid along the LoC, as well as the international border.[19] The Monitor has previously reported mine use in counter-insurgency operations in Kashmir.[20] Civilians continued to be killed and injured by mines in Kashmir in 2012 and early 2013 (see Casualties section).

Non-state armed groups

During 2012 and the first half of 2013, no use of antipersonnel mines by non-state armed groups (NSAGs) is known to have occurred in India. There have been reports of use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that appear to be command-detonated.

In a previous response to an RTI request on mine use by NSAGs, a Ministry of Home Affairs official, referring to the NSAG Naxal, wrote, “The naxal affected area are prone to IEDs planted by naxal operation.” He further noted that detection and disposal of IEDs is carried out by the state police/Central Armed Police Forces allotted to the affected states. Army units have not been tasked to deal with Naxal-related problem.”[21] Also, in an April 2010 response to an RTI request on mine use by NSAGs, an Indian Army official stated that NSAGs had used IEDs against the Indian Army in Jammu and Kashmir state, and that government forces had recovered mines.[22] No further details about the types of devices and circumstances of their recovery were specified.

In 2012 and the first half of 2013, the Communist Party of India-Maoist (CPI-M) and its armed wing, the People’s Liberation Guerrilla Army, continued to use command-detonated IEDs (which are not considered antipersonnel mines or prohibited by the Mine Ban Treaty).[23] These were frequently reported as “landmines” in the media and specialized reports on the conflict. Indian authorities regularly are reported recovering material from armed groups for making explosive weapons.[24] In January 2013, an explosive booby-trap, placed by Maoists, killed three civilians.[25] Maoist cadres have deployed large numbers of command-detonated roadside bombs, some of which have caused civilian deaths.[26]

No NSAGs have declared a ban on mine use during the past four years.[27]

 



[1] Statement by Amb. Sujata Mehta, Permanent Representative of India to the Conference on Disarmament, 14th Conference of the High Contracting Parties to Amended Protocol II, Geneva, 14 November 2012, www.unog.ch/80256EDD006B8954/(httpAssets)/2DC7B486AE7F1503C1257AD1005EC232/$file/08+India.pdf.

[2] India’s Explanation of Vote on A/C.1/66/L.4, 28 October 2011, is identical to its statement in 2010 and 2009; no copy of India’s 2012 Explanation of Vote on A/C.1/67/L.8 was publicly available.

[3] Since the First Review Conference of the Mine Ban Treaty in 2004, India has sent an observer to every Meeting of States Parties. It also attended every intersessional Standing Committee meeting after 2004, up until 2011.

[4] Statement of India, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 3 December 2012, www.apminebanconvention.org/meetings-of-the-states-parties/12msp/what-happened-at-the-12msp/day-1-monday-3-december/.

[5] India submitted a CCW Amended Protocol II Article 13 report summary sheet on 1 April 2013 covering the period April 2012 to March 2013. As in previous years, all information was marked as unchanged from the previous year, with the exception of Form E: International technical information exchange, co-operation on mine clearance, technical co-operation, and assistance, www.unog.ch/80256EDD006B8954/(httpAssets)/043191B63BFEF0B8C1257B590031D062/$file/India_APII_2013.pdf.

[6] CCW Amended Protocol II Article 13 Report, Form D, 4 December 2006. However, as reported by the Monitor in 2007, some of the production process appears to be carried out by commercial entities. See Landmine Monitor Report 2007, p. 833.

[7] Email reply to Right to Information (RTI) request made by Control Arms Foundation of India, from Ordnance Factory Board, Ministry of Defence, 5 May 2011.

[8] Email reply to RTI request made by Control Arms Foundation of India on behalf of the Monitor, from Saurabh Kumar, Director, Planning and Coordination, Department of Defence Production, Ministry of Defence, 2 April 2009.

[9] Statement of India, Mine Ban Treaty Twelfth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 3 December 2012, www.apminebanconvention.org/meetings-of-the-states-parties/12msp/what-happened-at-the-12msp/day-1-monday-3-december/.

[10] Statement by Amb. Jayant Prasad, Eighth Annual Conference of States Parties to CCW Amended Protocol II, Geneva, 6 November 2006.

[12] See Landmine Monitor Report 1999, p. 467. The figure may no longer be accurate following the large number of mines planted along the Pakistani border in 2001 and 2002, or taking into consideration new production of mines.

[13] Control Arms Foundation of India, “Conference on the Indispensability of Anti-Personnel Mines for India’s Defence: Myth or Reality?” Conference report, New Delhi, 26 March 2008, p. 75.

[14] Shubhadeep Choudhury, “Pokhran debate will impact forces, says Army officer,” The Tribune, 21 September 2010, www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090922/nation.htm - 10.

[16] Reply to RTI request, made by Control Arms Foundation of India, from Lt.-Col. Rajesh Raghav, GSO-1RTI, Central Public Information Officer, Indian Army, 8 April 2010.

[17] Statement by Brig. S.M. Mahajan, Director of Military Affairs, Ministry of External Affairs, Fifth National Conference of the Indian Campaign to Ban Landmines (Indian CBL), 23–24 April 2008, New Delhi. This has been stated frequently in the past. See Landmine Monitor Report 2007, p. 834; Landmine Monitor Report 2006, p. 898; and Landmine Monitor Report 2005, p. 716.

[18] In October 2011, a laborer stepped on a mine at the Khundru Army camp in Anantnag district. “Army porter injured in landmine explosion,” Press Trust of India, 19 October 2011, ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/army-porter-injured-in-landmine-explosion/868881.html.

[21] Email reply to RTI request made by Control Arms Foundation of India, from Sunil Kumar, Director (ANO), Indian Supreme Court, Naxal Management Division (ANO Wing), Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, 3 June 2011.

[22] Reply to RTI request, made by Control Arms Foundation of India, from Lt.-Col. Raghav, Indian Army, 8 April 2010.

[23] The CPI-M and a few other smaller groups are often referred to collectively as Naxalites. The Maoists also have a People’s Militia with part-time combatants with minimal training and unsophisticated weapons.

[24] See, “Two Maoist couriers arrested with explosives cache,” Press Trust of India (Raipur), 25 August 2013, www.dnaindia.com/india/1879882/report-two-maoist-couriers-arrested-with-explosives-cache.

[25] Deeptiman, Tewary, “Maoist tactics during Latehar gun battle evokes memories of acclaimed Bosnian war film,” Times of India, 10 January 2013, articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-10/india/36257807_1_karmatiya-forests-landmine-blast-jawan.

[26] See, “Two villagers killed as Maoists blast landmine,” Press Trust of India/Latehar (Jharkhand),8 January 2013, www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/two-villagers-killed-as-maoists-blast-landmine-113010800554_1.html.

[27] In March 2009, the Zomi Re-unification Organisation renounced mine use by signing Geneva Call’s Deed of Commitment, as did the Kuki National Organization in Manipur in August 2006, and the National Socialist Council of Nagalim-Isak/Muivah in Nagaland in October 2003. In October 2007, the United Jihad Council, a coalition of 18 organizations in Kashmir, issued a Declaration of a Total Ban on Antipersonnel Mines in Kashmir.


Mine Action

Last updated: 27 November 2016

The Republic of India is contaminated with mines, mainly as a result of large-scale mine-laying by government forces on and near the Line of Control (LoC) separating India and Pakistan during the 1971 war and the 2001–2002 stand-off between the two states. Antipersonnel and antivehicle mines were laid on cultivated land and pasture, as well as around infrastructure and a number of villages.

Despite occasional official claims that all the mines laid were subsequently cleared, reports of contamination and casualties have continued. A media report in November 2013 cited a government statement that about 20km2 of irrigated land was still mined in the Akhnoor sector of the LoC alone.[1] Security forces also report extensive use of mines by Maoist insurgents in the northeastern states of Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand, although mine types are not specified and may include command-detonated as well as victim-activated explosive devices.[2]

In June 2016, India’s NDTV news reported that the Indian army was demining areas of the LoC in Rajouri district, Kashmir in order to return land to communities for agricultural use as it vacated fields near to the border, which were reportedly taken over and mined during the Kargil Conflict in 1999 and Operation Parakaram in 2001. A commanding officer was quoted as saying that “we are clearing (mines) to avoid any accidents” and that “[t]hese mines are very old—sometimes they are not in the records also.”[3]

In 2015, four people were killed and three injured by mines and other explosive remnants of war. (See the Casualties and Victim Assistance country profile for further details.)

Program Management 

India has no civilian mine action program. 

Land Release

There is no publicly available information on land release in 2015. The Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for clearing mines as well as improvised explosive devices (IEDs) placed by non-state armed groups.[4] Media reports have indicated police also play an active part in clearing mines and improvised explosive devices on an ad hoc basis in states dealing with insurgency.



[1] A. Sharma, “Heavy rainfall worsening landmine peril for Kashmiri farmers,” Thomson Reuters Foundation, 5 November 2013.

[2] See for example, “Powerful landmines unearthed in Bihar,” Business Standard (Press Trust of India), 4 April 2014; “Landmines recovered in naxal infested Medininagar in Jarkhand,” Zeenews (Press Trust of India), 18 February 2015; and “India’s Maoists apologise after landmine,” SBS (AAP), 14 April 2014.

[4] Convention on Conventional Weapons Article 13 Report (for 2006), Form B. 


Support for Mine Action

From 2005–2009 the government of Azerbaijan provided more than half the country’s mine action budget of US$34,870,639 including almost 80% ($14,399,293 out of $18,298,763) of the 2008–2009 budget.[1]

 

National contributions: 2009

Year

Sector

Amount ($)

2009

Operations, clearance, risk education, victim assistance

8,086,793

2008

Operations, clearance, risk education, victim assistance

6,312,500

2007

Operations, clearance, risk education, victim assistance

2,235,296

2006

Operations, clearance, risk education, victim assistance

1,241,379

2005

Operations, clearance, risk education, victim assistance

749,561

Total

 

18,625,529

 

International contributions: 2009

Donor

Sector

Amount ($)

UNDP

ANAMA Baku and regional operations

300,000

United States

Clearance, victim assistance

483,000

NATO Partnership for Peace

Clearance

1,393,208

Total

 

2,176,208

 

Summary of contributions: 2005–2009

Year

National contributions ($)

International contributions ($)

2009

8,086,793

2,176,208

2008

6,312,500

1,723,262

2007

2,235,296

3,713,903

2006

1,241,379

4,530,961

2005

749,561

4,100,776

Total

18,625,529

16,245,110

 

 

 



[1] ANAMA, “Annual Report 2010,” p. 5.


Casualties and Victim Assistance

Last updated: 26 December 2016

Casualties

Casualties Overview

Total known casualties by end 2015

3,191 (1,083 killed; 2,107 injured; 1 unknown)

Casualties in 2015

7 (2014: 18)

2015 casualties by outcome

4 killed; 3 injured (2014: 2 killed; 16 injured)

2015 casualties by device type

6 antipersonnel mines; 1 explosive remnants of war (ERW)


In 2015, the Monitor identified seven casualties from mines and other ERW in the Republic of India. Of the total casualties for which the age and sex were known,[1] five were men and one was a boy. There were six civilian casualties, including one child casualty. All incidents occurred in the region of Jammu and Kashmir.[2]

The seven mine/ERW casualties identified in 2015 represented a decrease from the 18 casualties in 2014, 23 casualties in 2013, 78 casualties in 2012, 51 casualties in 2011, and 26 casualties recorded in 2010. Such fluctuations in annual casualty figures are not necessarily indicative of trends and can be attributed to the challenges in collecting consistent and accurate data from media and local sources, since India lacks a systematic data collection system.

The cumulative number of casualties in India is not known. Between 1999 and 2015, the Monitor identified 3,191 victim-activated mine/improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and ERW casualties in India (1,083 killed; 2,107 injured; 1 unknown). Nearly half of these casualties were civilians.

Victim Assistance

The total number of survivors is unknown, but at least 2,107 people were injured through the end of 2015.

Assessing victim assistance needs

In early 2015, Handicap International (HI) carried out a Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices (KAP) survey regarding risks surrounding mines/ERW and IEDs in four districts of Jammu and Kashmir. The survey focused on risk education, but also identified an apparently high prevalence of disability in border areas that required further investigation.[3]

Victim assistance coordination

Government coordinating body/focal point

None; for all persons with disabilities: the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment’s (MSJE) Division of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities

Coordinating mechanism(s)

None

Plan

None

 

India does not have any specific coordination mechanisms or national plans for mine/ERW victim assistance.

The MSJE coordinated the Indian physical rehabilitation sector. A new Department of Disability Affairs within the MSJE began operation in May 2012. Its role is to facilitate the empowerment of all persons with disabilities, to regulate physical rehabilitation services and various disability funds, as well as to develop and implement India’s legal framework as it relates to physical disability.[4]

The Rights of Persons with Disabilities bill was finalized in 2014 and began the parliamentary process for adoption.[5] The history of the bill process began with a draft proposal in 2011 following consultations with persons with disabilities and disabled people’s organizations (DPOs). The second draft was notified by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment in 2012. However, that draft was opposed in part by several key stakeholders. Disability rights actors united against the third draft of bill, of 2013, which was believed to contain violations of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).[6] In February 2014, the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill 2014 was introduced in the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of the parliament of India, to replace the Persons with Disabilities Act (1995). The Standing Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment of the Rajya Sabha submitted its report on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2014 on 7 May 2015.[7] As of May 2016, the bill had not yet been passed.

At the Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference in Maputo in 2014, India stated that “Mine victims are also assisted in rehabilitation through the provision of financial compensation, employment and health assistance. India’s ratification of the CRPD underscores the importance that we attach to victim assistance.”[8]

India stated that its 2007 ratification of the CRPD underscores the importance it attaches to victim assistance.[9] India did not submit a Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) Amended Protocol II Article 13 report nor a Protocol V Article 10 report for the period from April 2015 to March 2016. Its April 2014 to March 2015 report did not include details of victim assistance provided, and India noted that the situation had remained unchanged since 2006.[10] In the April 2014 to March 2015 CCW Protocol V Article 10 report, India stated that reporting on the protection of the civilian population from the effects of ERW was not applicable for India.[11]

Survivor inclusion

Associations of mine survivors were included in the consultative process to in initial draft of the national Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill (2011).[12]

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities[13]

Name of organization

Type of organization

Type of activity

Composite Regional Center

Government

Rehabilitation center in Poonch, Kashmir

Preetam Spiritual Foundation

National NGO

Support for prosthetics for persons with disabilities, including mine survivors, in Poonch, Kashmir

Hope Disability Center

National NGO

Outreach, referral, prosthetics and orthotics, rehabilitation

Jammu & Kashmir Landmine Survivors (JKLS)

Survivor association

Support to survivors to obtain legal benefits from the government

Control Arms Foundation and Human Rights Law Network

National NGO

Legal support and advocacy for the rights of mine survivors and other persons with disabilities

Indian Red Cross

National society

Emergency medical response and transport; referrals for mine/ERW survivors to rehabilitation centers

Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières, MSF)

International NGO

Psychosocial care to people wounded by violence and their families in Kashmir

Handicap International (HI)

International NGO

Rehabilitation and referral services at the Hope Disability Centre in Gandarbal, Jammu, and Kashmir; promotion of the rights of persons with disabilities among local government and communities; survey of knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding risks from mines/ERW

ICRC Special Fund for the Disabled (SFD)

International

organization

Programs suspended due to budget cuts

ICRC

International organization

Support for emergency medical response and healthcare in regions affected by violence; provision of materials and training; support for accommodation and transportation for two rehabilitation centers in Jammu and Kashmir and a district rehabilitation center in Nagaland; coverage of programs previously operated by the ICRC Special Fund for the Disabled (SFD)

 

Budget shortfalls forced the suspension of programs by the ICRC SFD in India in 2014. The ICRC took over support for SFD programs.[14] In 2015, the ICRC continued to provide support for six rehabilitation centers including the Artificial Limb Centre at the Bone and Joint Hospital, Srinagar; the Artificial Limb Centre at the Governmental Medical College, Jammu; and the Voluntary Medicare Society in Jammu and Kashmir. These ICRC-supported centers assisted 15 mine/ERW survivors to obtain prosthetic limbs in 2015, a decrease compared to 26 in 2014 and 64 survivors in 2013.[15] However, this continues to represent a significant increase in contrast with the period 2000 to 2010, when just 95 survivors were served during the entire period.

The government has stated at international meetings that mine survivors and families of those killed by mines are entitled to compensation.[16] Monetary compensation to landmine survivors and family members of people killed is distributed by the Ministry of Defence under a 2006 decree. However, many survivors have not been successful in applying for compensation.[17]

The standard one-time compensation payment from the government is the equivalent of US$1,500, which is inadequate to cover treatment and the future needs of survivors.[18] To pay for medical expenses, families often have to borrow money or sell their land or livestock, resulting in worsening economic situations overall.[19]

Psychosocial support for survivors continued to be limited. MSF provided mental health and psychosocial care, particularly for conflict and weapons victims at five fixed locations in Srinagar and Baramulla districts of Jammu and Kashmir. Teams also visited victims of violence in Srinagar hospitals and provided psychological first aid, thereby ensuring basic psychological, social, and material needs were being met.[20]

India’s Persons with Disabilities Act 1995 protects the rights of persons with disabilities. However, discrimination in employment, education, and access to healthcare remained pervasive, especially in rural areas. Legislation requires that all public buildings and transportation be accessible for persons with disabilities, although accessibility remained limited.[21]

India ratified the CRPD on 1 October 2007.



[1] The age of all casualties and the sex of six casualties were recorded.

[2] Monitor media monitoring 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2015. For casualty data from previous years, see previous Monitor country profiles for India available on the Monitor website.

[3] Handicap International (HI), “Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Survey: Jammu and Kashmir, India,” April 2015, p. 5.

[4] ICRC Physical Rehabilitation Programme (PRP), “Annual Report 2013,” Geneva, 2014.

[5] ICRC PRP, “Annual Report 2014,” Geneva, 2015, p. 56.

[7] PRS Legislative Research, “The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2014,” undated; and “Government introduces Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill in Rajya Sabha,” The Times of India, 7 February 2014.

[8] Statement of India, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 27 June 2014.

[9] Ibid.

[12] Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2011, as appointed by the MSJE, “The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2011,” Hyderabad, 30 June 2011, pp. 39–48.

[13] There are hundreds of service providers (most of which are public or private health or rehabilitation centers) delivering assistance to persons with disabilities in India. The organizations listed here have some specific focus on mine/IED/ERW survivors. ICRC, “Annual Report 2015,” Geneva, 2016, p. 390; ICRC PRP, “Annual Report 2013,” Geneva, 2014; ICRC SFD, “Annual Report 2014,” Geneva, 2015; Hope Disability Center website; Handicap International, “India,” undated; MSF, “International Activity Report 2013 – India,” 31 December 2013; and Athar Parvaiz, “Explosives shatter lives in Kashmir,” Asia Times Online, 21 May 2013.

[14] ICRC SFD, “Annual Report 2014,” Geneva, 2015, p. 23.

[15] ICRC, “Annual Report 2015,” Geneva, 2016.

[16] Statement of India, Mine Ban Treaty Third Review Conference, Maputo, 27 June 2014; statement of India, Mine Ban Treaty Tenth Meeting of States Parties, 29 November 2010; statement by Prabhat Kumar, Permanent Mission of India to the Conference on Disarmament, Mine Ban Treaty Second Review Conference, Cartagena, 1 December 2009; and statement by Prabhat Kumar, Permanent Mission of India to the Conference on Disarmament, Mine Ban Treaty Ninth Meeting of States Parties, Geneva, 24–28 November 2008.

[17] Vishal Jasrotia, “Victims of landmine blasts, shelling left scarred,” Tribune India, 30 July 2015; report from Monitor victim assistance field mission to Poonch, Jammu, and Kashmir, 26 October–2 November 2013; Ashutosh Sharma, “Living on the edge,” Outlook India, 27 October 2014; “Mine blast victims in Poonch decry delay in rehabilitation,” Greater Kashmir News, 24 December 2013; “Heavy rainfall worsening landmine peril for Kashmiri farmers,” Thomson Reuters Foundation, 5 November 2013; and Baba Umar, “Mines of war maim innocent,” Tehelka Magazine, Vol. 8, Issue 17, 30 April 2011.

[18] Athar Parvaiz, “Explosives shatter lives in Kashmir,” Asia Times Online, 21 May 2013.

[19] Vishal Jasrotia, “Victims of landmine blasts, shelling left scarred,” Tribune India, 30 July 2015; Ashutosh Sharma, “The Bruised Childhood,” Greater Kashmir, 25 August 2012; “Heavy rainfall worsening landmine peril for Kashmiri farmers,” Thomson Reuters Foundation, 5 November 2013; and Athar Parvaiz, “Explosives shatter lives in Kashmir,” Asia Times Online, 21 May 2013.

[21] United States Department of State, “2015 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: India,” Washington, DC, 13 April 2016.