Is Arvind Kejriwal mentally challenged?

dish


Reasons for the decision:

I. Procedure and facts:

1. First procedure:

1.1. The complainant (hereinafter referred to as BF), an Indian citizen from the state of Punjab, entered Austria illegally on November 9, 2009 and made his first application for international protection on the same day under the identity XXXX, XXXX.

He justified this application for international protection by stating that he was a supporter of the Congress party and that he had quarreled with political opponents, members of the Akali Dal party. He would have been injured several times and threatened with killing, which is why he would have left the country.

1.2. After the investigation was carried out, the Federal Asylum Office (hereinafter referred to as BAA) rejected the BF's application for international protection in accordance with Section 3 (1) in conjunction with Section 2 (1) No. 13 AsylG in a decision dated January 26, 2010, number 09 13.906-BAW from (ruling point I.), did not grant him the status of a person entitled to asylum or, in accordance with Section 8 (1) in conjunction with Section 2 (1) no.13 AsylG, the status of a person entitled to subsidiary protection in relation to the country of origin India (ruling point II.) and combined this decision in accordance with Section 10 (1) (2) AsylG with an expulsion to India (point III.).

In the reasoning for the decision it was stated that the BF was a citizen of India. His identity is not certain, he entered Austria illegally. The BF had not made any persecution within the meaning of the AsylG credible, and there were no valid reasons against a rejection, repatriation or deportation or against an expulsion of the BF from the Austrian federal territory to India. The first authority also made determinations on the situation in the country of origin India. The Federal Asylum Office judged the BF's arguments to be vague and implausible, he could hardly have given details and, due to contradictions, could not have gained credibility. In addition, an alternative domestic escape or protection alternative is in any case given.

1.3. The BF appealed against this decision to the Asylum Court (hereinafter AsylGH).

The AsylGH dismissed this complaint as unfounded with a decision of November 9, 2012, number C8 411.951-1 / 2010 / 13E, according to §§ 3, 8 and 10 AsylG, whereby it essentially followed the decision of the BAA.

2. Second procedure:

2.1. On June 14, 2014, the BF submitted his second application for international protection (follow-up application), indicating his date of birth as XXXX.

2.2. In the first survey on June 14, 2014 by the public security service, the BF stated the following in the presence of an interpreter for the Punjabi language:

Since he would have been checked and arrested several times by the Austrian police, he would have taken the train to Italy in September 2013, from where he would have flown to Pakistan with a forged passport assisted by a tractor. Then he would have crossed the border into India and arrived home in October 2013. In December 2013 he would have left again and flown from Delhi to Moscow. From there he would have reached Austria via countries unknown to him.

When he was at home, there would have been another clash with the members of the opposing group Akali Dal. One of the opponents would have been seriously injured and the other members would have pursued the BF. He would have gone into hiding for a while and decided to leave the country a second time.

There are no new reasons to flee, he would have had the same problems on his return as before his first departure. He did not know whether the opponents had filed charges against him for assault and attempted murder. But he expects a charge and a prison sentence.

2.3. When he was questioned on June 24, 2014 in front of the Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum (hereinafter BFA), in the presence of an interpreter for the Punjabi language, the BF essentially stated that he had arrived in India in July 2013 and that there were two people there Stayed with his parents for months. He could prove his stay in India because he had attended a driving school and had been admitted to the hospital. In response to the fact that he had mentioned October as the month of his return to the police, the BF argued that this was true and that he had previously made a mistake in reasoning. He could have a driver's license that would have been issued to him during his stay and a hospital confirmation sent to him. It will take him about three to four weeks.

His old reasons for fleeing are still valid, only there was another argument after his return. He and five others discovered two opponents in a bazaar sometime in December and beat them brutally. Since then, the BF has been on the run. He does not know whether the police are looking for him, but he is afraid of them and the opponents. He would have saved part of the money for the illegal second exit and borrowed part of it from friends.

2.4. During his interrogation on August 5th, 2014 in front of the BFA, in the presence of an interpreter for the Punjabi language and a legal advisor, the BF essentially stated after receiving legal advice that he could not produce any documents that could prove his two-month stay in India .

He now wants to tell the truth and admit that he had not been to India. He had no papers and someone told him to file a second asylum application and claim that he was back in India. His problems from the first asylum procedure are still upheld. Since he had not been in India, he could not say whether there was anything new. There are these arguments in India, which is why he cannot return.

Here in Vienna he lives with fellow countrymen in a shared apartment.

2.5. With the decision of the BFA dated August 6, 2014, number 791390602-14852066, the BF's application for international protection dated June 14, 2014 in accordance with Section 68 (1) AVG was rejected because of a decided matter.

The BFA essentially stated that the BF's first asylum application had been legally rejected and that the BF had not brought forward any new facts in the asylum procedure in question, which would have occurred after the conclusion of the first procedure.

The authority in question stated that the present submission was based on the flight history described in the preliminary proceedings, which would have been qualified as untrustworthy and contradicting even then, which is why it is a decided matter.

Based on the findings in the preliminary proceedings and on the basis of the findings that no significant change in the situation can be derived with regard to the country reports on India, it can still not be assumed that there will be persecution directed against the BF and that he will continue to do so when returning to India also offers the possibility of domestic flight alternatives, should this actually be necessary.

2.6. Against this decision of the BFA, the BF brought the appeal of the complaint in due time, with which the decision was contested in its entirety.

The Federal Administrative Court dismissed the complaint as unfounded in accordance with Section 68 (1) AVG on October 17, 2014, Zl .: W191 1411951-1 / 3E. The revision was declared inadmissible.

The court found that the BF was named XXXX, XXXX XXXX, was a citizen of India, a Sikh religious denomination and was single. His identity is not fixed.

Since the previous asylum procedure was finally concluded with the ruling of the Asylum Court on November 9, 2012, there have been no significant changes to the facts or to the legal provisions to be applied in the case.

In order to be worthy of evidence, the ruling court essentially stated that the submission regarding the BF's reasons for fleeing corresponded to his submission in the preliminary proceedings. Even then, these reasons for fleeing were judged to be unsubstantiated, inconsistent on several points and thus incomprehensible and, overall, untrustworthy. Even now, the BF had only given general and superficial information without being able to gain credibility. The BF himself admitted that his assertion that he had returned to India and that there had been renewed threats was not true. The current assertion that his life is in danger in India represents a continuation of the escape story described in the preliminary proceedings, which was already assessed as vague, partly contradictory and thus as a conceptual construct. The main reasons that prompted the BF to leave his home country at the previous time have therefore not changed since his asylum application on November 9, 2009, and his new asylum application is in fact based on the same facts as at the time of the initial application. There is therefore no change in the facts, which is why the Federal Office rightly rejected the follow-up application as inadmissible because of a decided matter within the meaning of Section 68 AVG.

With regard to the examination of the existence of the prerequisites for granting the status of beneficiary of subsidiary protection, no newly arisen facts could be made credible.

3. Application for the issue of a residence title in cases that are particularly worthy of consideration and complaints about measures:

3.1. In a letter from his legally friendly representative dated January 20, 2016, he sent an initial application for the BF by post for a residence permit in particularly worthy of consideration cases in accordance with Section 56 (1) AsylG.

3.2. On June 9, 2016, the BF's passport was seized in accordance with Section 39 of the BFA-VG, whereas the BF, through its legally friendly representative, lodged a complaint with the Federal Administrative Court on June 20, 2016. This complaint was rejected as unfounded according to § 39 BFA-VG with the decision of the Federal Administrative Court, Zl .: W202 2128437-1 / 3E.

4. Present procedure:

4.1. On October 6, 2020, the BF submitted the follow-up application in question for international protection (3rd application for asylum).On the same day, the first questioning by organs of the public security service took place.

Regarding his personal circumstances, he stated that he belonged to the Sikh religion and the Jat ethnic group. He is single, attended elementary school for 12 years, had no professional training and was most recently a farmer. His parents, a sister and a brother live in India. He lived in India in Punjab.

Regarding his travel route, he stated that he left India legally for Milan in September 2009. He was there for about 2-3 weeks before he then lived in Austria (from September 2009 to December 2016). He lost his travel document in Italy. From 2017 to September 2020 he lived in Italy again. He lost his job in a horse stable there, so he had no accommodation and then returned to Austria.

When asked about his reason for fleeing, the BF stated as follows:

“My old grounds for asylum are still valid. I returned to Austria about 20 days ago and was attacked by 5 people on September 27, 2020 and injured my upper arm with a machete. I filed a complaint against the perpetrators and was therefore threatened by the perpetrators, they told my family in India that if I do not withdraw my complaint, they will have me killed if I return to India. These are all my reasons for fleeing. "

If he returns, he is afraid for his life.

The BFA noted that the BF wears a plaster cast on his left arm.

3.2. On November 11, 2020, the BF was questioned in writing by the BFA with the assistance of an interpreter for the Punjabi language.

The BF stated that he had given truthful information to date and that his health was fine. He has no identity documents and no relatives in Austria. He lives with a friend in Vienna. He entered Austria in 2009 and has always been here. He is in telephone contact with his mother once or twice a month.

His alleged reasons for fleeing the preliminary proceedings are still valid.

The BF was charged that his preliminary proceedings in the second instance had been finally decided negatively. When asked whether anything had changed with regard to his reasons for fleeing and why he was applying for international protection again, the BF stated as follows (A: applicant, L: head of official act)

“A: I was injured by four people in Austria. After that I was in the hospital for five days. I don't have a white card and then I applied for asylum.

L: Why don't you return to India voluntarily?

A: You will kill me. I had a problem there.

L: India is a big country and there is no registration system. It is inconceivable that there would be problems for you everywhere. What do you think?

A: My opponents have contacts everywhere. You could find me.

Q: Who are you afraid of?

A: You are a politician. I had problems with them.

Q: You have been here for 11 years now. It doesn't believe that these people are just waiting for you looking for you all over India! What do you think?

A: In India, people wait 30-50 years to be able to harm you.

Q: This submission, i.e. the problems with members of this party, have already been dealt with in the first and second proceedings. As I said, these procedures ended in a negative way. In these proceedings the unreliability of this information was recorded. Do you want to say something about that?

A: I cannot go back to India.

L: What do you fear if you return to India?

A: I'm afraid of the politicians and also of the people who beat me in Austria. These people threatened my family in India and said that if I should file a complaint, they would kill my family in India. "

Regarding his living conditions in Austria, the BF stated that he had no one here. He is currently unemployed, his friend gives him drinks and food. He used to deliver newspapers, but not anymore. He was not active in any association or organization. He could speak “40-50 percent” German. Otherwise he speaks Punjabi and English.

His parents, a brother, a sister and two uncles would live in India.

Regarding the state assessments, he stated that the situation was not good for him. He had problems there, it was difficult.

When asked whether the BF had the opportunity to present everything that seemed important to him, the BF stated:

“A: I lied when I was interviewed for the first time in Schwechat. I wasn't working in Italy.

L: You already lied between your first and second trials, claiming you returned to India.

A: Yes, I lied about that too. "

4.3. With the contested decision of the BFA, the follow-up application of the BF for international protection both with regard to the status of asylum seeker and with regard to the status of beneficiary of subsidiary protection in accordance with Section 68 (1) AVG was rejected because of a decided matter (ruling points I. and II.). The BF was not granted a residence permit for reasons worthy of consideration in accordance with Section 57 AsylG (point III.). Pursuant to Section 10, Paragraph 1, Item 3 of the Asylum Act in conjunction with Section 9 of the BFA-VG, a return decision was issued against the BF in accordance with Section 52, Paragraph 2, Item 2 of the FPG (point IV of the BF is admissible to India according to § 46 FPG (point V.). In accordance with Section 55 (1a) FPG, no deadline was granted for voluntary departure (point VI.). Finally, in accordance with Section 53 (1) in conjunction with (2) no. 6 FPG, an entry ban limited to two years was issued against the BF (ruling point VII.).

The BFA found that the BF's identity had not been established. He would not suffer from any serious mental disorders or infectious diseases and he was not immunocompromised. The BF does not have a residence permit and is not aware of any circumstances that would prevent expulsion from the federal territory.

His allegation that he was injured by four people in Austria and that his family in India was then threatened by these people has no credible core. A new issue that was essential to the decision could not be established.

In Austria he has no family or family ties, does not work here and lives in accommodation for asylum seekers. He has been in Austria since 2009, since his illegal entry. The BF had not fulfilled his obligation to leave the country and was staying illegally in Austria. There is no particular consolidation of integration.

The authority in question stated that the BF does not fall under the risk group of older people, people with previous illnesses or people with other risk factors with regard to the current pandemic due to the corona virus.

The reasons now put forward why the BF does not want to return to the country of origin are essentially identical to those of the preliminary proceedings. These had already been sufficiently appreciated in the preliminary proceedings. Already in the first asylum procedure it was established that the flight history alleged by him was completely untrustworthy, or that there were no indications that the Indian authorities would actually deny the BF effective protection against possible attacks and threats. In addition, the BF has at least one domestic flight alternative at its disposal. His present submission, according to which he was injured by people in Austria and his family was threatened by these people, is inextricably linked with his completely implausible allegations during the first trial. His escape allegations had already been sufficiently appreciated in the preliminary proceedings and the credibility had been denied. In addition, the events that have now been alleged have no credible core, especially since the BF had become entangled in contradictions with regard to his stay in Italy and the threat in Austria. He was also unable to submit any complaints or other qualified evidence about the attack in Austria. The objective and decision-relevant facts are unchanged, which is why there is a decided case within the meaning of Section 68 AVG. Also with regard to § 8 AsylG there were no indications of a change relevant to the decision, neither with regard to his personal situation, nor to the general situation in the country of origin.

With regard to point III. it was stated that the requirements for the issuance of a residence title according to § 57 AsylG would not be met. Furthermore, it was stated that an integration of the BF that opposed the return could no more be recognized than a situation in India that would prevent the return, whereby the current situation in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic was also taken into account. There is no deadline for voluntary departure due to the rejection decision. The issuing of an entry ban in accordance with Section 53 (1) in conjunction with (2) no. 6 FPG was necessary because the BF had disregarded his obligation to leave the country and could not prove the means of maintenance. His maintenance is currently only guaranteed through state support.

The BFA found the following about the BF's country of origin:

"Political situation

Last change: 03/30/2020

With over 1.3 billion people and a multi-religious and multi-ethnic society, India is the most populous democracy in the world (CIA Factbook February 28, 2020; see AA July 19, 2019). In accordance with the constitution, the states and union territories have a high degree of autonomy and have primary responsibility for law and order (USDOS 3/11/2020). The capital New Delhi has a special legal status (AA 2.2020a).

The principle of the separation of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branches is enforced according to the British model (AA 2.2020a; see AA 7/19/2019). The independence of the judiciary is guaranteed by the constitution, the instance is divided into three stages (AA 07/19/2019). The Supreme Court in New Delhi is at the head of the judiciary and is followed by the High Courts at state level (GIZ 11.2019a). Freedom of the press is guaranteed by the constitution, but is subject to repeated challenges (AA 2.2020a).India has a vibrant civil society (AA 2.2020a).

India is a parliamentary democracy and has a multi-party system and a bicameral parliament (USDOS 11.3.2020). In addition, there are parliaments at the state level (AA 7/19/2019).

The president is the head of state and is elected by an electoral committee, while the prime minister is the head of government (USDOS 11.3.2020). The president performs largely representative tasks. Political power, on the other hand, rests with the Prime Minister and his government, which is responsible to Parliament. Ram Nath Kovind, who comes from the caste of the Dalits (untouchables), has been President since July 25, 2017 GIZ 11.2019a).

In April / May 2019, around 900 million eligible voters elected a new lower house. In the system of simple majority voting, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) under the leadership of incumbent Prime Minister Narendra Modi was able to improve its 2014 election results again (AA 07/19/2019).

As the clear winner with 352 out of 542 seats, the party alliance “National Democratic Alliance”, with the BJP as the strongest party (303 seats), is once again the government. The BJP top candidate and incumbent Prime Minister Narendra Modi was confirmed in office. The United Progressive Alliance around the Congress Party (52 seats) received a total of 92 seats (AA July 19, 2019). Apart from a few violent clashes v. a. in the state of West Bengal, correct and free. In the constituency of Vellore (East) in the state of Tamil Nadu, the elections were suspended due to the strong suspicion of buying votes and will be rescheduled at a later date (AA July 19, 2019). With the BJP government under Narendra Modi, the Hindu nationalist tones have increased significantly. The numerous Hindu national organizations, above all the volunteer corps RSS, now feel that they have been strengthened and are increasingly trying to actively determine domestic policy in their favor (GIZ 11.2019a). With the reform of citizenship law, the ruling BJP is advancing its Hindu nationalist agenda. The reform was necessary to address the shortcomings in the Assam state's civil registry and pave the way for a nationwide civil registry. Critics accuse the government of the fact that the projects primarily discriminate against Muslims, could deprive a large number of people of their right to citizenship and undermine the fundamental values ​​of the constitution (SWP 02/02/2020; cf. TG 02/26/2020). Government critics blamed the inciting rhetoric and minority policies of the ruling Hindu nationalists, the interior minister and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for the violence, in which more than 30 people were killed in late February 2020. Hundreds were injured (FAZ February 26, 2020; see DW February 27, 2020).

In the election for the regional parliament of the New Delhi capital region, the party of Prime Minister Narendra Modi suffered a heavy defeat against the ruling anti-corruption party Aam Aadmi (AAP). This won the regional election again with 62 out of 70 electoral districts. The AAP, led by Arvind Kejriwal, scored points with voters with topics such as subsidies for water and electricity, improving the infrastructure for medical services and the safety of women, while the BJP campaigned for the controversial citizenship law (KBS 02/12/2020). Modi's party has already suffered severe setbacks in various regional elections in the states of Maharashtra and Jharkhand in the past two years (quanatra.de 02/14/2020; see KBS 02/12/2020).

Under Prime Minister Modi, India is pursuing a more active foreign policy than before. The earlier strategy of "strategic autonomy" is increasingly being overshadowed by a policy of "multiple partnerships" with all major countries in the world. The most important goal of Indian foreign policy is the creation of a peaceful and stable global environment for the country's economic development and, as an emerging great power, the increasing responsible participation in shaping rules-based international order (BICC 12.2019). A permanent seat on the UN Security Council remains a strategic goal (GIZ 11.2019a). At the same time, India is striving for stronger regional integration with its neighbors, with alternative concepts to the one-sidedly sino-centric “New Silk Road” playing an important role. In the South Asia region, India is also increasingly relying on the regional organization BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation). India is a dialogue partner of the Southeast Asian community and a member of the “Regional Forum” (ARF). India is also taking part in the East Asia Summit and, since 2007, in the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) accepted India and Pakistan as full members in 2017. The will of the BRICS group of states (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) recently appeared to have decreased (BICC 12.2019).

Relations with Bangladesh are of a special nature, as the two countries share a border that is over 4,000 km long. India controls the upper reaches of the most important rivers in Bangladesh and was historically instrumental in the formation of Bangladesh during its war of independence. Difficult issues such as transit, border lines, unregulated border crossings and migration, water distribution and smuggling are discussed in regular government talks. The country's relations with the EU are particularly important from an economic point of view. The EU is India's largest trade and investment partner. The trade in goods in both directions has in fact steadily expanded (GIZ 11.2019a).

Swell:

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (Germany) (July 19, 2019): Federal Foreign Office, report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India (as of May 2019), https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local /2014276/Deutschland___Ausw%C3%A4rtiges_Amt%2C_Bericht_zur_asyl-_und_ Abschiebungsrelevanten_Lage_in_der_Republik_Indien_%28Stand_Mai_2019%29%2C_19.07.2019.pdf, accessed 19.3.2020

- AA - Foreign Office (2.2020a): India: Political Portrait, https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/de/aussenpolitik/laender/lösungen-node/politisches-portrait/206048, accessed on March 27, 2020

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (11.2019b): India, Foreign Policy, https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/de/aussenpolitik/laender/lösungen-node/politisches-portrait/206048, accessed January 16, 2020

- BICC - Bonn International Center for Conversion (12.2019): Information Service - Security, Armaments and Development in Recipient Countries of German Armaments Exports: Country Information India, http://www.ruestungsexport.info/user/pages/04.laenderreports/india/2019_Indien.pdf , Accessed on February 10, 2020

- CIA - Central Intelligence Agency (February 28, 2020): The World Factbook - India, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/in.html, accessed March 17, 2020

- DW - Deutsche Welle (February 27, 2020): Sieren's China: Difficult triangular relationship, https://www.dw.com/de/sierens-china-schwieriges-dreiecksverh%C3%A4ltnis/a-52556817, accessed February 28, 2020

- FAZ - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (February 26th, 2020): More and more deaths after unrest in Delhi, https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/lösungen-tote-bei-gewalt- between-hindus-und- muslimen-in-delhi-16652177.html, accessed on February 28, 2020

- GIZ - German Society for International Cooperation GmbH (11.2019a): India, History and State, https://www.liportal.de/haben/geschichte-staat/, accessed on March 27, 2020

- GIZ - German Society for International Cooperation GmBH (3.2020b): India, Economic System and Economic Policy, https://www.liportal.de/haben/wirtschaft-entwicklung/, accessed March 30, 2020

- GIZ - German Society for International Cooperation GmbH (3.2020c): India, overview, https://www.liportal.de/lösungen/ueberblick/, accessed on March 27, 2020

- KBS - Korean Broadcasting System (February 12, 2020): Defeat for India’s Prime Minister Modi in the election in New Delhi, http://world.kbs.co.kr/service/contents_view.htmlang=g&board_seq=379626, accessed February 14, 2020

- Quantara.de (February 14, 2020): Major defeat for India’s Prime Minister Modi in the election in New Delhi, https://de.qantara.de/content/herbe-niederlage-fuer-indiens-regierungschef-modi-bei-wahl- in-new-delhi, accessed February 20, 2020

- SWP - Science and Politics Foundation (8th 2019): India's struggle for citizenship, https://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/aktuell/2020A02_wgnArora_WEB.pdf, accessed February 18, 2020

- SWP - Science and Politics Foundation (8.2019): No rest in Kashmir. The Dissolution of the State and the Consequences for India, https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2019A45/, accessed January 16, 2020

- TG - The Guardian (February 26, 2020): Anti-Muslim violence in Delhi serves Modi well, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/26/violence-delhi-modi-project-bjp-citizenship -law, accessed on February 28, 2020

- USDOS - US Department of State (March 11, 2020): 2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2026357.html, accessed March 13, 2020

Security situation

There is a multitude of tensions and conflicts in India, violence is the order of the day (GIZ 11.2019a). Terrorist attacks in previous years (December 2010 in Varanasi, July 2011 in Mumbai, September 2011 in New Delhi and Agra, April 2013 in Bangalore, May 2014 in Chennai and December 2014 in Bangalore) and in particular the attacks in Mumbai in November 2008 pressured the government. Only a few of the attacks in recent years have been completely cleared up and the reform projects announced in response to these incidents to improve the Indian security architecture have not been implemented consistently (AA April 24, 2015). But there have also been terrorist attacks with an Islamist background in the rest of the country in recent years. In March 2017, an Islamic State (IS) cell in the capital of the state of Madhya Pradesh placed a bomb on a passenger train. According to the police, the terror cell is also said to have planned an attack on a rally by Prime Minister Modi (BPB 12.12.2017). The country supports the US measures against international terrorism. Internally, draconian new anti-terror legislation has been passed, the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO), which human rights groups fear could also be used against legitimate political opponents (BICC 12.2020).

The tensions in the north-east of the country continue as well as the dispute with the Naxalites (Maoist underground fighters, note) (GIZ 11.2019a), who are questioning the state monopoly on the use of force in certain areas (AA July 19, 2019).

Conflict regions are Jammu and Kashmir, the northeastern regions and the Maoist belt. Attacks by Maoist rebels on security forces and infrastructure continued in Jharkhand and Bihar. In Punjab, violent opponents of the government repeatedly led to murders and bomb attacks. In addition to the Islamist terrorists, the Naxalites contribute to the destabilization of the country. From Chattisgarh they fight in many union states (from Bihar in the north to Andrah Pradesh in the south) with armed force against state institutions. In the north-east of the country, numerous separatist groups (United Liberation Front Assom, National Liberation Front Tripura, National Socialist Council Nagaland, Manipur People’s Liberation Front etc.) are fighting against state power and demanding either independence or more autonomy. Hindu radicalism, which is directed against minorities such as Muslims and Christians, is seldom officially classified in the terror category, but rather referred to as "communal violence" (ÖB 8.2019).

Surveys by Maoist groups in the east-central mountain regions of India are ongoing. According to reports, rebels levied illegal taxes, confiscated food and accommodation, and participated in kidnapping and forced recruitment of children and adults. Tens of thousands of civilians have been displaced by the violence and are living in government-run camps. Regardless, more than 40 insurgent groups in the seven northeastern states of India, seeking either greater autonomy or the complete independence of their ethnic or tribal groups, continue to attack security forces. There are also still acts of violence among the groups, which are expressed in bomb attacks, murders, kidnappings, rape of civilians and in the formation of extensive blackmail networks (FH March 4th, 2020).

The South Asia Terrorism Portal recorded a total of 907 deaths from violence related to terrorism in 2016. In 2017, 812 people were killed by terrorist violence and in 2018, 940 people were killed by acts of terrorism. In 2019, the number of victims of terrorism-related violence nationwide totaled 621 deaths. As of March 5, 2020, 81 deaths were registered as a result of the use of terrorist violence [Note: the figures quoted include civilians, security forces and terrorists] (SATP March 17, 2020).

The government acts with great severity and rigor against militant groups, who mostly advocate the independence of certain regions and / or adhere to radical (e.g. Maoist subversive) views. If such groups renounce violence, negotiations about their demands are usually possible. Nonviolent independence groups are free to be politically active (AA 7/19/2019).

India and Pakistan

Pakistan neither recognizes the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to the Indian Union in 1947 nor the de facto division of the region between the two states since the first war in the same year. India, on the other hand, takes the position that Jammu and Kashmir as a whole are not part of India (Piazolo 2008). The extremely tense situation between India and Pakistan has repeatedly erupted in border battles in the past, which often threatened to escalate into a major war. Since 1947 there have been three wars due to the disputed Kashmir area (BICC 12.2019; see BBC 23.1.2018).

After the peaceful struggle for independence against British colonial rule, the bloody division of British India, which was accompanied by mass exodus, severe outbreaks of violence and pogroms, showed how difficult it will be to keep the ethnically, religiously, linguistically and socio-economically extremely heterogeneous society together in a nation-state. The inter-religious violence continued even after the partition between India and Pakistan (BPB 12.12.2017).

India accuses Pakistan, among other things, of supporting terrorist organizations active in India and calls for an end to this support as well as support for Kashmiri separatists. Pakistan, on the other hand, is calling for a referendum on the future of the region, as the loss of the largely Muslim area is perceived as a threat to Pakistan's Islamic identity (BICC 12.2019). After a terrorist attack on an Indian military base in Kashmir in mid-September 2016, the rhetoric on both sides escalated again (DW 29.9.2016). So there are repeated exchanges of fire between Indian and Pakistani troops at the armistice line in Kashmir (BICC 12.2019). For example, on February 26, 2019, in retaliation for a suicide attack on February 14, 2019, the Indian Air Force penetrated Pakistani airspace for the first time since the war in 1971 to set up a training camp for the Islamist group Jaish-e-Mohammad in the Balakot region, Khyber province Pakhtunkhwa, to be bombed (SZ February 26, 2019; see FAZ February 26, 2019, WP February 26, 2019). India is convinced that the suicide attack on February 14, 2019 was planned and supported from Pakistan (NZZ February 26, 2019). The armies of the hostile neighbors had repeatedly opened fire since the beginning of March 2019 at various points across the de facto border between the parts of Kashmir controlled by Pakistan and India (Presse 2.3.2019) and shortly afterwards reported that the situation along the "Line of Control" is relatively calm again (Reuters 03/03/2019)

India and China

The Chinese-Indian border in the Himalayas is still controversial. Also, China has never forgiven India for granting exile to the Dalai Lama. Nevertheless, neither side has an interest in turning the differences of opinion into open dispute (FAZ February 27, 2020), but both India and China have ambitions to expand their sphere of influence in Asia (BICC 12.2019).

The US-China trade war has strengthened economic ties between India and China and created new opportunities for Indian companies in the Chinese market. Still, Delhi is concerned that Chinese goods are flooding the domestic market and crowding out local suppliers. That is also the reason why India wants to renegotiate again when it comes to the "Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership" (RCEP), the largest free trade agreement in the world with most Asian countries. India feels geopolitically challenged by Beijing, as China has forged alliances with India's neighboring countries Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka within its “New Silk Road”. The economic corridor with the archenemy Pakistan is a thorn in the side of the Indians (FAZ February 27, 2020). The determining factor of India's relationship with China is the coexistence and coexistence of two ancient cultures, which are now the two most populous countries in the world, which repeatedly results in rivalry. The bilateral relationship is characterized by a significant imbalance in favor of China (BICC 12.2019).

India and Sri Lanka maintain a rather ambivalent relationship, which was strongly influenced by the civil war in Sri Lanka between the Tamil minority and the Sinhalese majority, which has now ended. The Tamil population group in India comprises around 65 million people, which results in a certain influence on Indian foreign policy (GIZ 11.2019a). There are also minor conflicts between India and Bangladesh (BICC 12.2019).

Swell:

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (Germany) (July 19, 2019): Federal Foreign Office, report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India (as of May 2019), https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local /2014276/Deutschland___Ausw%C3%A4rtiges_Amt%2C_Bericht_zur_asyl-_und_ Abschiebungsrelevanten_Lage_in_der_Republik_Indien_%28Stand_Mai_2019%29%2C_19.07.2019.pdf, accessed 19.3.2020

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (July 19, 2019): Report on the asylum and deportation-relevant situation in the Republic of India

- BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation (23.1.2018): India country profile - Overview, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12557384, accessed on 29.1.2019

- BICC - Bonn International Center for Conversion (12.2019): Information Service - Security, Armaments and Development in Recipient Countries of German Armaments Exports: Country Information India, http://www.ruestungsexport.info/user/pages/04.laenderreports/india/2019_Indien.pdf , Accessed on February 10, 2020

- BPB - Federal Center for Civic Education (Germany) (12.12.2017): Conflict portrait: India, http://www.bpb.de/internationales/weltweit/innerstaatliche-konfligte/215390/ Indien, accessed March 18, 2020

- DW - Deutsche Welle (September 29, 2016): India and Pakistan let the Kashmir conflict escalate, https://www.dw.com/de/industrie-und-pakistan- Klassen-kaschmir-konflikt-eskalieren/a-35922107, Accessed February 11, 2020

- FAZ - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (February 26, 2019): Pakistan: We reserve the right to react to India's attacks, https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/indische-luftwaffe-verletzt-den-pakistanischen -luftraum-16061769.html, accessed on August 6, 2019

- FH - Freedom House (March 4th, 2020): Freedom in the World 2020 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2025925.html, accessed March 10th, 2020

- GIZ - German Society for International Cooperation GmbH (11.2019a): India, https://www.liportal.de/haben/geschichte-staat/, accessed March 17, 2020

- NZZ - Neue Züricher Zeitung (February 26, 2019): The spiral of escalation is turning, https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/ Indien-bombardiert-pakistan-spirale-der-eskalation-draht-ld.1462893, accessed 6.8 .2019

- ÖB - Austrian Embassy New Delhi (8.2019): Asylum Country Report India

- Piazolo, Michael (2008): Power and Powers in a Multipolar World. Springer publishing house. Page 201

- Presse, die (2.3.2019): Kashmir: Seven dead in shots at the border between India and Pakistan, https://diepresse.com/home/ausland/aussenpolitik/5588780/Kaschmir_Sieben-Tote-bei-Schuessen-an-Grenze -of-India-and-Pakistan, accessed August 6, 2019

- Reuters (March 3, 2019): India-Pakistan border quiet but Kashmir tense amid militancy crackdown, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-kashmir-pakistan-idUSKCN1QK093, accessed August 6, 2019

- SATP - South Asia Terrorism Portal (February 15, 2020): Data Sheet - India Yearly Fatalities: 2000 - 2020, https://www.satp.org/datasheet-terrorist-attack/fatalities/india, accessed March 17, 2020

- SZ- Süddeutsche Zeitung (February 26, 2019): India bombs Pakistani part of Kashmir, https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/haben-pakistan-luftangriff-1.4345509, accessed on August 6, 2019

- WP - The Washington Post (February 26, 2019): India strikes Pakistan in severe escalation of tensions between nuclear rivals, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/pakistan-says-indian-fighter-jets-crossed-into- its-territory-and-carried-out-limited-airstrike / 2019/02/25 / 901f3000-3979-11e9-a06c-3ec8ed509d15_story.html? utm_term = .ee5f4df72709, accessed on August 6, 2019

Regional problem areas Jammu and Kashmir

Last change: 03/30/2020

On August 5, 2019, India ended the special status stipulated in the constitution (ZO 6/8/2019) for the predominantly Muslim region (FAZ 6/8/2019; see GIZ 11.2019a) of the Indian part of Kashmir by decree (ZO 6/8/2019). Immediately afterwards, the parliament in Delhi decided to repeal Article 370 of the Indian Constitution (FAZ 7/8/2019), which grants Jammu and Kashmir a special status and proposed dividing the state into two union territories, namely Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh (IT 6/8/2019). 2019). Article 370 grants the region a certain autonomy, such as its own constitution, its own flag and the freedom to enact laws (BBC 6/8/2019) with the exception of matters relating to foreign and defense policy (DS 7/8/2019). This represented a compromise between the largely Muslim population and the Hindu leadership in New Delhi (ARTE 7/8/2019). In addition to Article 370, Article 35A was also repealed, which allowed the local parliament to determine who is a citizen of the state and who can own land and exercise government offices there (NZZ 5/5/2019).

The abolition of autonomy rights, which is also controversial in India, is fueling tensions in the region. Critics fear that the Hindu nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government are striving to "Hinduize" the area (TNYT 6/8/2019). To prevent unrest, the Indian authorities interrupted all communication channels and sent an additional 10,000 soldiers (SO August 4, 2019) to the already highly militarized region (ARTE 7 August 2019) and leading regional politicians were placed under house arrest (FAZ 7 August 2019). There are isolated reports of minor resistance actions against the actions of the security forces, which, however, have not been officially confirmed (BBC 7/8/2019). According to media reports, more than 500 people have been arrested during raids in the state of Jammu and Kashmir (HP August 8, 2019). Pakistan, which also lays claim to the entire region (ORF 5/8/2019), condemns the move as illegal and directs a clear threat to India through the Pakistani military (ZO 6/8/2019). Criticism also came from Beijing (FAZ 6/8/2019), where India's step to abolish the special status of Kashmir is described as “unacceptable” and “not binding” (SCMP 7/8/2019). The withdrawal of the special administrative status of the state of Jammu and Kashmir has been accompanied by numerous constitutional and human rights violations (RLS 1.2020).

Jammu and Kashmir were among the states most severely affected by terrorism in India in 2018 (USDOS 11/1/2019). Militant groups in Jammu and Kashmir continue to fight against security forces, Kashmiri institutions and local politicians who they believe to be “governors” and “collaborators” of the Indian central government. Defectors to the government and their families are particularly cruelly "punished". After a downward trend in 2015, the number of incidents classified as terrorist in Jammu and Kashmir increased in 2016 and 2017 (AA 7/19/2019; see FH 3/4/2020).

At least 44 people were killed in a suicide attack (TOI February 15, 2019) on Indian security forces in the Goripora area near Awantipora in the Pulwama district of Kashmir. Dozens were injured (TOI February 15, 2019; see IT February 15, 2019).

In India, the central goal of Islamist fundamentalists remains the secession of Kashmir. In line with the jihad ideology, many Islamist groups also see themselves at war against all infidels and are striving for the violent Islamization of the entire subcontinent. The conflict is fueled by the ongoing economic disadvantage and discrimination against many Muslims (BPB 12/12/2017).

In September the European Union addressed the situation in Jammu and Kashmir at the UN Human Rights Council and called on India to lift the ongoing restrictions and to protect the rights and fundamental freedoms of the affected population. The European Parliament also held a special debate on Kashmir and urged both India and Pakistan to comply with their international human rights obligations (HRW 01/14/2020).

In Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab and Manipur, the authorities have special powers to search for and detain people without an arrest warrant (USDOS March 13, 2019, March 11, 2020; cf. BBC October 20, 2015). There were repeated allegations of human rights violations by government forces in Jammu and Kashmir during security operations, which many attributed to political failure to ensure accountability (HRW, January 17, 2019). In September 2019, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed her concern about human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir (HRW 14.1.2020).

After a rather quiet phase between 2011 and 2014, the situation has recently deteriorated significantly again. (GIZ 11.2019a).

From mid-2016, the violence increased noticeably. Gunfire on the border with Pakistan also increased significantly in 2016 after the murder of a popular, militant separatist leader. Civilians in the border area are often affected. Since the summer of 2017, the government has deliberately followed a hard line, which provides for the targeted tracking of leaders of the militants and, in the event of resistance, violent access. There are evidently repeated battles in which bystanders can get between the fronts. In 2017, 358 people died in the course of the counterinsurgency. Indian security forces are often accused of human rights abuses, few of which are punished. Civil liberties are restricted, especially in times of unrest. In 2018, too, there were several bloody clashes. Despite the appointment of an official negotiator for Kashmir, the government's offer of dialogue has so far not been sufficiently effective. The violence is currently not decreasing (AA 7/19/2019). The South Asia Terrorism Portal recorded a total of 267 fatalities from terrorism-related violence in the Jammu and Kashmir region in 2016. In 2017, 357 people were killed by acts of terrorism, in 2018 there were 452 fatalities and in 2019 283 deaths were recorded as a result of terrorist violence. As of March 15, 2020, a total of 49 deaths from the use of terrorist violence were recorded [Note: the figures given include civilians, security forces and terrorists] (SATP March 15, 2020).

In the Indian part of Kashmir, the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) remains in force (USDOS March 11, 2020; see BPB November 20, 2017). Extrajudicial killings, rape and torture by members of the security forces repeatedly occurred under this special authorization law. Over 90 people died and thousands were injured in the suppression of protests (BPB 11/20/2017). The state human rights commission of Jammu and Kashmir, set up in 1997, had little effect. In particular, it has no way of investigating attacks by the army and paramilitary forces (ÖB 8.2019). In July 2019, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) published a report highlighting human rights violations in the Kashmir region between May 2018 and June 2019 and updating a similar document from 2018. The report condemns the excessive and extrajudicial violence exercised by Indian security forces and criticizes the Indian government's refusal to investigate the reported violations (OHRC 8 July 2019; see AI 30 January 2020).

The tense situation between India and Pakistan discharges again and again in border battles, which often threaten to escalate (BICC 12.2019).

Swell:

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (Germany) (July 19, 2019): Federal Foreign Office, report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India (as of May 2019), https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local /2014276/Deutschland___Ausw%C3%A4rtiges_Amt%2C_Bericht_zur_asyl-_und_ Abschiebungsrelevanten_Lage_in_der_Republik_Indien_%28Stand_Mai_2019%29%2C_19.07.2019.pdf, accessed 19.3.2020

- AI - Amnesty International (January 30, 2020): Human Rights in Asia-Pacific; Review of 2019 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2023868.html, accessed January 17, 2020

- ARTE - (7.8.2019): Kashmir: Is the conflict between India and Pakistan escalating again? https://www.arte.tv/de/articles/kaschmir-eskaliert-der-konflikt-between- cuty-india-and-pakistan-erneut, accessed on February 11, 2020

- BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation (August 6, 2019): Article 370: What happened with Kashmir and why it matters, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-49234708, accessed February 11, 2020

- BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation (7.8.2019): Article 370: Kashmiris express anger at loss of special status, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-49261322, accessed 11.2.2020

- BICC - Bonn International Center for Conversion (12.2019): Information Service - Security, Armaments and Development in Recipient Countries of German Armaments Exports: Country Information India, http://www.ruestungsexport.info/user/pages/04.laenderreports/india/2019_Indien.pdf , Accessed on February 10, 2020

- BBC - British Broadcasting Corporation (October 20, 2015): Why are Indian Sikhs angry ?, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34578463, accessed March 13, 2020

- BPB - Federal Center for Political Education (November 20, 2017): Domestic Conflicts - Kashmir, http://www.bpb.de/internationales/weltweit/innerstaatliche-konfligte/54616/kaschmir, accessed February 20, 2020

- DS - Der Standard (7/8/2019): Kashmir conflict: Pakistan expels Indian diplomats, https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000107163187/pakistan- sucht-indische-diplrafen-aus-toter-bei-protesten -in-srinagar, accessed February 11, 2020

- FAZ - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (7/8/2019): Warnings from Islamabad, https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/kaschmir-konflikt-warnung-aus-islamabad-16321737.html, accessed February 11, 2020

- GIZ - German Society for International Cooperation GmbH (11.2019a): India, https://www.liportal.de/haben/geschichte-staat/, accessed January 16, 2020

- HP - Huffpost (8.8.2019): India Arrests Over 500 In Kashmir As Pakistan Suspends Railway Service, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/india-arrests-over-500-in-kashmir-as-pakistan- suspends-railway-service_n_5d4c19a7e4b09e729742389e? guccounter = 1, accessed on August 9, 2019

- HRW - Human Rights Watch (January 14, 2020): World Report 2020 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2022689.html, accessed January 17, 2020

- HRW - Human Rights Watch (January 17, 2019): World Report 2019 - India, ttps: //www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2002249.html, accessed January 17, 2012

- IT - India Today (6/8/2019): Article 370: China says opposed to Ladakh as Union Territory, https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/china-reaction-jammu-kashmir-article-370-1577915 -2019-08-06, accessed February 11, 2020

- IT - India Today (February 15, 2019): Kashmir terror attack: Pakistan says attack matter of concern, rejects India's charges As it happened, https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/pulwama-awantipora-jammu-and -kashmir-terror-attack-live-1456117-2019-02-14, accessed on 6.8.2019

- NZZ - Neue Züricher Zeitung (5.8.2019): India lifts Kashmir’s autonomous status and risks drastically increasing tensions in the region, https://www.nzz.ch/international/kaschmir- Indien-provoziert-mit- the-lifting-of-the-special-status-ld. 1499966, accessed February 11, 2020

- ÖB - Austrian Embassy New Delhi (8.2019): Asylum Country Report India

- ORF - Österreichischer Rundfunk (5.8.2019): India removes Kashmir's special status, https://orf.at/stories/3132670/, accessed on February 11, 2020

- OHRC - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (8.7.2019): Update of the Situation of Human Rights in Indian-Administered Kashmir and Pakistan-Administered Kashmir from May 2018 to April 2019, https: //www.ohchr .org / Documents / Countries / IN / KashmirUpdateReport_8July2019.pdf, accessed March 17, 2020

- ONHCR - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (14.6.2018): Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Kashmir: Developments in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir from June 2016 to April 2018, and General Human Rights Concerns in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/IN/DevelopmentsInKashmirJune2016ToApril2018.pdf, accessed on January 23, 2019

- ORF - Österreichischer Rundfunk (5.8.2019): India removes Kashmir's special status, https://orf.at/stories/3132670/, accessed on February 11, 2020

- RLS - Rosa Luxemburg Foundation (1.2020): Unification and exclusion; India's Hindu nationalist government is pushing forward with the restructuring of society, https://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/Standpunkte/Standpunkte_03-2020.pdf, accessed February 11, 2020

- SATP - South Asia Terrorism Portal (March 15, 2020): Datasheet - Jammu & Kashmir, Data View, https://www.satp.org/datasheet-terrorist-attack/fatalities/india-jammukashmir#, accessed March 17, 2020

- SCMP - South China Morning Post (7/8/2019): China calls India's move to scrap Kashmir's special status 'not acceptable' and not binding, https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3021712/ china-calls-indias-move-scrap-kashmirs-special-status-not, accessed February 11, 2020

- SO - Spiegel Online (4.8.2019): Pakistan asks Trump to mediate, https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/kaschmir-nach-terrorwarnung-verlassen-tausende-das-gebiet-a-1280384.html , Accessed February 11, 2020

- TOI - Times of India (February 15, 2109): Pulwama terror attack: What we know so far, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/67994287.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst, accessed on August 6, 2019

- TNYT - The New York Times (6/8/2019): In Kashmir Move, Critics Say, Modi Is Trying to Make India a Hindu Nation, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/06/world/asia/ jammu-kashmir-india.html, accessed February 11, 2020

- USDOS - US Department of State (November 1, 2019): Country Report on Terrorism 2018 - Chapter 1 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2019355.html, accessed February 11, 2020

- USDOS - US Department of State (March 11, 2020): 2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2026357.html, accessed March 13, 2020

- ZO - Zeit Online (7/8/2019): Pakistan identifies the Indian ambassador, https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2019-08/kaschmir-konflikt-pakistan-indischer-botschafter-ausweisung-hasan, access February 11, 2020

Security agencies

Last change: 03/30/2020

The Indian Police Service is not a direct law enforcement or law enforcement agency (BICC 12.2019) and is subordinate to the states (AA 07/19/2019). Rather, it acts as a training and recruiting agency for police officers in the states. With regard to the federal structures, the police are organized decentrally in the individual states. However, given a national police law, numerous national criminal laws and the central recruiting office for executives, the individual units have a number of things in common. In general, the police are entrusted with prosecuting, preventing and combating crime, and maintaining public order, while at the same time exercising partial control over the various secret services. Within the police there is a Criminal Investigation Department (CID), in which a special unit (Special Branch) is integrated. While the former is entrusted with national and interstate crimes, the task of the special unit is to gather information and monitor all subversive elements and persons. In almost every state, special police units have been set up to deal with women and children. Most of the law enforcement agencies are controlled by the Ministry of Home Affairs (BICC 12.2019).

In addition to structural deficits, a lack of trust in the reliability of the police arises from frequent reports of human rights violations such as torture, extrajudicial killings and threats that were allegedly perpetrated by the police (BICC 12.2019; cf. FH March 4, 2020). There have been investigations and prosecutions of individual cases, but inadequate enforcement and a lack of trained police officers contribute to poor efficiency (USDOS 03/11/2020). There is still a lack of accountability for mistreatment by the police and the implementation of police reforms (HRW 14.1.2020).

The Indian military is subordinate to civil administration and has shown little interest in a political role in the past. The president is in charge of the supreme command. According to their self-image, the army is the “protector of the nation”, but only in a military sense (BICC 12.2019). The military can be deployed domestically if this is necessary to maintain internal security (AA 7/19/2019; cf. BICC 12/2019). Paramilitary units are used as part of the armed forces, especially in internal conflicts, for example in Jammu and Kashmir as well as in the northeastern states. These missions often lead to significant human rights violations (BICC 12.2019).

The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to maintain “law and order” is used as the legal basis for the deployment of armed forces - especially land forces - in unrest areas and against terrorists (USDOS 03/11/2020). The law gives the security forces in "unrest areas" extensive powers to use force, to make arrests without an arrest warrant and searches without a search warrant (AA 7/19/2019; cf. FH 4/3/2020, USDOS 3/11/2020). The Prevention of Unlawful Activities Act (UAPA) gives authorities the ability to detain people in riot-related or terrorism-related cases (USDOS 3/11/2020). The security forces are granted extensive immunity (AA July 19, 2019; see FH March 4, 2020, USDOS March 11, 2020).

In July 2016, the Supreme Court raised initial doubts about the constitutionality of the law in an interlocutory ruling on the AFSPA in Manipur. The protection of human rights must also be guaranteed under the regulations of the AFSPA. The controversial Special Authorization Act was repealed in Meghalaya state in April 2018, limited to eight police districts in Arunachal Pradesh state, and has been partially repealed in three other Arunachal Pradesh police districts since April 2019. It remains in force unchanged in the following unrest areas: Assam, Nagaland and parts of Manipur. There is a separate version for the state of Jammu & Kashmir (AA 7/19/2019).

The Indian paramilitary units deployed in the central Indian states affected by left-wing extremist groups (so-called Naxalites) are largely subordinate to the Ministry of the Interior (AA 07/19/2019). These include in particular the National Security Guard (NSG National Security Police), a special force for personal protection composed of members of the army and the police, also known as the "Black Cat", the Rashtriya Rifles, a special force for protecting traffic and communication links in the event of civil unrest to combat armed rebellions, the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) - the Federal Reserve Police, a militarily equipped police force for special operations - the Border Security Force (BSF - Federal Border Guard) as the largest and best-equipped militia to protect the borders with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar. But it is also used to maintain internal order in other parts of the country. The so-called Assam Rifles are responsible for border defense in the northeast - the Indo-Tibetan Border Force (ITBP) as the Indo-Tibetan Border Police, the Coast Guard and the Railway Protective Force for the protection of the national railways and the Central Industrial Security Force for the security of the state-owned companies (ÖB 8.2019).Particularly in unrest areas, the security forces have extensive powers to combat secessionist and terrorist groups, which are often used excessively (AA 07/19/2019).

The Special Frontier Force is subordinate to the Prime Minister's Office. The so-called border special forces are an elite unit that is deployed on sensitive sections in the border area with China. They operate within the framework of the secret services, the so-called Intelligence Bureau and the Research and Analysis Wing (War Heros of India, January 15, 2017).

Swell:

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (Germany) (July 19, 2019): Federal Foreign Office, report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India (as of May 2019), https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local /2014276/Deutschland___Ausw%C3%A4rtiges_Amt%2C_Bericht_zur_asyl-_und_ Abschiebungsrelevanten_Lage_in_der_Republik_Indien_%28Stand_Mai_2019%29%2C_19.07.2019.pdf, accessed 19.3.2020

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (July 19, 2019): Report on the asylum and deportation-relevant situation in the Republic of India

- BICC - Bonn International Center for Conversion (12.2019): Information Service - Security, Armaments and Development in Recipient Countries of German Armaments Exports: Country Information India, http://www.ruestungsexport.info/user/pages/04.laenderreports/india/2019_Indien.pdf , Accessed February 11, 2020

- Freedom House (March 4th, 2020): Freedom in the World 2020 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2025925.html, accessed March 9, 2020

- HRW - Human Rights Watch (January 14, 2020): World Report 2020 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2022689.html, accessed January 17, 2020

- ÖB - Austrian Embassy New Delhi (8.2019): Asylum Country Report India

- USDOS - US Department of State (March 11, 2020): 2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2026357.html, accessed March 13, 2020

- War Heros of India (January 15, 2017): Special Forces of India Part 3: Special Frontier Force, https://gallantryawardwinners.blogspot.com/2017/01/Special-Frontier-Force.html, accessed March 19, 2020

General human rights situation

Last change: March 30, 2020

India signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 (AA 07/19/2019). National legislation on human rights matters is broad. All important human rights are constitutionally guaranteed (ÖB 8.2019). However, the implementation of these guarantees is often not fully guaranteed (AA 07/19/2019). A number of security laws limit the rule of law guarantees, e.g. the right to a fair trial. These laws were tightened after the Mumbai terrorist attacks in November 2008; Among other things, the presumption of innocence was suspended for certain criminal offenses. Particularly in unrest areas, the security forces have extensive powers to combat secessionist and terrorist groups, which are often used excessively. There are credible reports of extrajudicial killings (AA 7/19/2019).

Human rights issues include indications of arbitrary executions, kidnapping, torture and rape, among others. Corruption remains widespread. Social violence based on denomination and caste remains a matter of concern. Lower cast Muslims and Dalit groups remain the most vulnerable. (USDOS 3/11/2020).

A generalized assessment of the human rights situation is hardly possible for India: Drastic violations of fundamental rights and deficits in the rule of law coexist with extensive civil liberties, progressive laws and committed initiatives by civil society. Above all, the reality of the lower social classes, who make up the majority of the population, is often characterized by violations of fundamental rights and discrimination (AA 7/19/2019). Many human rights violations in India remain deeply rooted social practices, not least the caste system (AA 7/19/2019). Women, members of ethnic and religious minorities and lower castes are systematically discriminated against (BICC 12.2019). While civil and human rights are largely respected by the government, the situation in regions where there are internal conflicts is sometimes very bad. This is especially true in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast of the country. The security forces, both the police, the paramilitary units and the military, are accused of serious human rights violations during their operations in the crisis areas of the country. The military and paramilitary units are charged with kidnapping, torture, rape, arbitrary arrest and extrajudicial executions. The security forces have been accused of partiality, particularly with regard to the tensions between Hindus and Muslims, which led to thousands of deaths in 2002. The mood is fueled by Hindu nationalist parties, which are also represented in the government (BICC 12.2019).

The Indian security forces are accused of violating human rights (FH March 4th, 2020) and the separatist rebels and terrorists in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, in the northeast and in the areas influenced by the Maoists are also accused of serious human rights violations, including murders and torture of members of the armed forces and the police , as well as accused by government officials and civilians. Insurgents are also responsible for the recruitment and use of child soldiers (USDOS March 11, 2020; see FH March 4, 2020).

In some states, the law restricts religious conversion (USDOS 6/21/2019), restrictions on freedom of movement continue (USDOS 01/03/2020).

Swell:

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (Germany) (July 19, 2019): Federal Foreign Office, report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India (as of May 2019), https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local /2014276/Deutschland___Ausw%C3%A4rtiges_Amt%2C_Bericht_zur_asyl-_und_ Abschiebungsrelevanten_Lage_in_der_Republik_Indien_%28Stand_Mai_2019%29%2C_19.07.2019.pdf, accessed 19.3.2020

- BICC - Bonn International Center for Conversion (12.2019): Information Service - Security, Armaments and Development in Recipient Countries of German Armaments Exports: Country Information India, http://www.ruestungsexport.info/user/pages/04.laenderreports/india/2019_Indien.pdf , Accessed on February 10, 2020

- FH - Freedom House (March 4th, 2020): Freedom in the World 2020 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2025925.html, accessed March 18, 2020

- ÖB - Austrian Embassy New Delhi (8th 2019: Asylum Country Report India

- USDOS - US Department of State (June 21, 2019): 2018 Report on International Religious Freedom: India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2011171.html, accessed February 20, 2020

- USDOS - US Department of State (March 11, 2020): 2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2026357.html, accessed March 13, 2020

Freedom of expression and freedom of the press

Last change: March 30, 2020

The constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression. Although the Indian Constitution does not specifically mention freedom of the press, the government generally respects it in practice, even if reports are made of cases in which representatives of media critical of the government are pressured or pressured by the government or actors classified as close to the government harassed and in some cases killed (USDOS 03/11/2020). India was ranked 142nd out of 180 countries in the 2019 Press Freedom Index (RwB 2019). In 2018 India was in 138th place out of 180 countries and has declined by two places compared to 2017 (RwB 2018).

The independent media express a wide range of opinions and views without restriction. The law forbids content that could offend religious sentiments and provoke hostility between groups. The authorities have relied on these rules to restrict print media, radio and television, and the publication and distribution of books. The state continues to have a monopoly on AM radio and restricts the granting of licenses to FM radio stations whose broadcasts are for entertainment and educational purposes. Satellite television is widespread and represents competition for the state television network (USDOS 3/11/2020). Human rights violations, corruption and political scandals are widely reflected in the reporting. India has a very broad media landscape, although press freedom is sometimes restricted by informal measures (AA 7/19/2019).

In the reporting period, Indian authorities made use of existing legal restrictions (“public order”, “reason of state”, etc.) in individual cases to exercise censorship. The elections that took place in April and May 2019 were marked by sharp accusations against political opponents and “fake news”. There were no particular restrictions on the freedom of the press during the election campaign (AA 07/19/2019). The use of the internet is increasing rapidly. In December 2018, experts assumed there were 566 million Internet users (around 40 percent of the population). In January 2019, the Indian government proposed that it authorize itself to censor content on the Internet, especially in the area of ​​social media. A final bill is still pending. With regard to the freedom of science, an increased polarization has been observed at universities since the beginning of the Modi government in 2014 (AA 07/19/2019). However, there are some Internet access restrictions and reports that the government occasionally monitors digital media users such as chat rooms and face-to-face communications. IT laws allow the government to block Internet websites and content and to prosecute the sending of messages with inflammatory or offensive content (FH March 4th, 2020; see USDOS March 11th, 2020). The security authorities have extensive supervisory powers and block access to the network sporadically and as required in entire regions. According to Human Rights Watch, this happened in 121 cases between 2018 and November (2017: 60 cases), 52 of them in Jammu and Kashmir (2017: 27 cases according to AA September 18, 2018).A study by the Canadian organization Citizen Lab found in 2018 that India had blocked the most Internet sites out of ten South Asian and Arab countries, including sites from the established media, human rights organizations and UN organizations (AA 07/19/2019).

In general, individuals can criticize the government publicly or privately without fear of reprisals. In certain cases, local authorities use anti-profanity laws to arrest people who appear to be making political speeches (USDOS 03/11/2020). There are known cases in which the government is allegedly pressured or harassed media criticizing the government. As a result of their reporting, some journalists and media workers were exposed to violence and harassment. In addition, critics of Hindu nationalism are defamed as "anti-Indian" in online harassment campaigns (RwB 2019). In 2018 six journalists were killed in India (USDOS March 11, 2020; see RwB 2019) I.

Swell:

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (Germany) (July 19, 2019): Federal Foreign Office, report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India (as of May 2019), https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local /2014276/Deutschland___Ausw%C3%A4rtiges_Amt%2C_Bericht_zur_asyl-_und_ Abschiebungsrelevanten_Lage_in_der_Republik_Indien_%28Stand_Mai_2019%29%2C_19.07.2019.pdf, accessed 19.3.2020

- Federal Foreign Office (September 18, 2018): Report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India

- FH - Freedom House (March 4th, 2020): Freedom in the World 2020 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2025925.html, accessed on March 9th, 2020

- RwB - Reporters without Borders (2019): World press freedom index 2019, https://rsf.org/en/2019-world-press-freedom-index-cycle-fear, accessed March 16, 2020

- RwB - Reporters without Borders (2019): World press freedom index 2019, https://rsf.org/en/india, accessed March 16, 2020

- USDOS - US Department of State (March 11, 2020): 2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2026357.html, accessed March 16, 2020

Freedom of assembly and association, opposition

The law guarantees freedom of assembly and association, and the government generally respects these rights (USDOS 3/11/2020). While there are some restrictions on freedom of assembly and association - such as a provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure that empowers the authorities to restrict freedom of assembly and impose curfews when "immediate prevention or quick remedial action" is required - peaceful protests take place regularly. Nevertheless, as part of nationwide protests against the Citizenship Change Act in December 2019, some regional and local governments used, among other things, live ammunition to enforce the ban on assembly. Around two dozen people had been killed by the end of the year. Many demonstrators were arrested (FH March 4th, 2020).

An application for holding meetings and demonstrations must be submitted in advance to the relevant local authorities. Occasionally, applications are rejected, for example in Jammu and Kashmir, where the authorities sometimes do not issue a permit to separatist groups (USDOS March 11, 2020; cf. ÖB 8.2019) and the security forces sometimes deny access to demonstrations to members of political groups who take part in protests, or arrest them (USDOS March 11, 2020; see ÖB 8.2019). In times of unrest in Jammu and Kashmir, the authorities use the Code of Criminal Procedure to prohibit public gatherings or to impose curfews (USDOS 03/11/2020).

Union strikes and public protests can paralyze all public life in the affected area and lead to violence. However, trade unions play a relatively minor role in India as only about 8teen percent of Indian workers are unionized. The "Essential Services Maintenance Act" allows the government to ban strikes in state-owned companies (ÖB 8.2019)

The political opposition can operate freely. The state and national elections to community assemblies, city councils, and parliaments are free, equal, and secret. Irrespective of problems resulting from the size of the country, widespread poverty or high illiteracy rate and local manipulations, they are carried out correctly according to international observers. Obstacles of the opposition occur particularly at regional and municipal level, e.g. through only limited police protection for politicians, withholding of permits for election campaign events, physical assaults by supporters of other parties. Such incidents are picked up by the press and can be addressed by the political parties in a publicly effective manner. As a rule, they also result in sanctions from the independent and respected state election commission (“Election Commission of India”) (AA 7/19/2019).

Major Indian parties include the Indian National Congress (INC), Bharatiya Janata Party, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), Communist Party of India and Communist Party of India (Marxist). Well-known and influential regional parties are Telugu Desam Party (TDP) in Andhra Pradesh, Muslim League in Kerala, Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam in Tamil Nadu and Samajwadi Party in Uttar Pradesh (GIZ 11.2019a).

India has a diverse political landscape. In addition to the large national parties Congress (in its roots socialist-inspired national collection movement), Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP, Hindu-nationalist) and supraregional communist parties, there are a large number of regional parties that form the state governments in individual states alone or in coalitions, but are also of increasing political importance at the national level (AA 7/19/2019).

The most important opposition party in terms of number of MPs is the Congress Party (Indian National Congress - INC) under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi (ZO May 25, 2019).

Swell:

- AA - Federal Foreign Office (Germany) (July 19, 2019): Federal Foreign Office, report on the asylum and deportation-related situation in the Republic of India (as of May 2019), https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local /2014276/Deutschland___Ausw%C3%A4rtiges_Amt%2C_Bericht_zur_asyl-_und_ Abschiebungsrelevanten_Lage_in_der_Republik_Indien_%28Stand_Mai_2019%29%2C_19.07.2019.pdf, accessed 19.3.2020

- GIZ - German Society for International Cooperation GmbH (11.2019a): India, https://www.liportal.de/haben/geschichte-staat/, accessed March 30, 2020

- FH - Freedom House (March 4th, 2020): Freedom in the World 2020 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2025925.html, accessed on March 9th, 2020

- ÖB - Austrian Embassy New Delhi (8.2019): Asylum Country Report India

- USDOS - US Department of State (March 11, 2020): 2019 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2026357.html, accessed March 16, 2020

- USDOS - US Department of State (March 13, 2019): Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2018 - India, https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2004219.html, accessed August 13, 2019

- ZO - Zeit Online (May 24, 2019): Governing party wins absolute majority in parliamentary elections, https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2019-05/haben-parlamentswahl-narendra-modi-bharatiya-janata-absolute- majority, accessed February 11, 2020

Freedom of movement

The law grants nationwide freedom of movement, international travel, migration and repatriation, and the government generally respects these rights (USDOS 3/11/2020). The state monopoly on the use of force is in some areas called into question by the activities of the "Naxalites". Apart from that, freedom of movement within the country is guaranteed (AA 07/19/2019).

The government relaxed restrictions on foreign travelers regarding travel to Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, Manipur and parts of Jammu and Kashmir, except for foreigners from Pakistan, China and Myanmar. The Ministry of the Interior and state governments require citizens to obtain special permits prior to travel to travel to certain restricted regions or restricted zones (USDOS 3/11/2020).