publications

IV.   Abuses by Salwa Judum

From the escalation of the conflict in June 2005 until mid-2007, Salwa Judum leaders typically spearheaded its activities with the support of government security forces. Salwa Judum leaders mostly consist of people aggrieved by Naxalite activities—contractors or middlemen, members of non-tribal and landed tribal communities, sarpanches (village officials), patels (village headmen), and priests.49 Salwa Judum members—ordinary tribal and non-tribal civilians, including children—carried out their leaders’ instructions and conducted operations along with government security forces. They travelled from one village to another, particularly to villages that they believed were Naxalite strongholds, conducting violent raids, combing them for Naxalites, evacuating villagers to government-run camps (also known as Salwa Judum camps, base camps, or relief camps), and in some cases, beating, raping, and killing villagers.

During this period, Salwa Judum members and government security forces used a range of coercive techniques to force civilians to participate in Salwa Judum meetings or to relocate them to camps. They routinely claimed that villagers who did not join Salwa Judum must be Naxalites. On many occasions, they also carried out reprisal measures against camp residents who returned to their villages or against persons who fled from Chhattisgarh and settled in Andhra Pradesh.

The Indian central and Chhattisgarh state governments deny providing support to Salwa Judum.50 The Chhattisgarh government has maintained that:

The ‘Salva Judum’ movement is people’s initiative and it is reiterated that ‘Salva Judum’ is not State sponsored. The State is committed to resolve the problem of Naxalism and any peaceful movement, which resists the violent methods, definitely gets support of States.… Salwa Judum is not a vigilante force but a spontaneous people’s resistance group comprising of local tribals. The State cannot stifle the people’s initiate [sic] taken by local tribals to counter Naxalism.51

In our research, however, we found overwhelming evidence of state support for Salwa Judum. Government security forces either actively participated in Salwa Judum abuses or, despite being present at the scene, failed to prevent Salwa Judum members from committing abuses. In fact, the chairperson of the second Indian Administrative Reforms Commission (a commission of inquiry set up by the president of India) criticized the Chhattisgarh government for delegating its law and order powers to an “extra constitutional [prohibited by the Constitution] power” like Salwa Judum. 52 

While there is evidence that joint raids by government security forces and Salwa Judum members have been on the decline since mid-2007, the practice has by no means ended—reprisals against villagers who leave camps are ongoing. The Chhattisgarh state government claims that it upholds the rule of law. However, over a three-year period starting mid-2005 it has shown little willingness to directly take on Salwa Judum as an abusive vigilante force and prevent government security forces from participating in such abuses.

Under international law, the Indian central and Chhattisgarh state governments are ultimately responsible for the lives and well-being of the population. Internationally recognized human rights set out in core human rights instruments guarantee all people equal and inalienable rights by virtue of their inherent human dignity. 53 Under these instruments, the state as the primary duty holder has an obligation to uphold these rights. This includes not only preventing and punishing human rights violations by government officials and agents, but also protecting communities from criminal acts committed by non-state actors such as Salwa Judum members.

India is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), one of the core international human rights treaties. The Human Rights Committee, the expert body that monitors compliance with the ICCPR, has observed that a state party’s failure to “take appropriate measures or to exercise due diligence to prevent, punish, investigate or redress the harm caused by such acts by private persons or entities” itself constitutes a violation of the ICCPR.54 Similarly, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions has observed that when “[a] pattern [of killing] becomes clear in which the response of the Government is clearly inadequate, its responsibility under international human rights law becomes applicable. Through its inaction the Government confers a degree of impunity upon the killers.”55  

A. Salwa Judum raids on villages coercing civilian participation

Human Rights Watch interviewed 52 individuals who were eyewitnessesto Salwa Judum raids on 18 villages in Dantewada and Bijapur districts. Each of these villages had been destroyed or vacated due to Salwa Judumraids since June 2005. These persons also gave Human Rights Watch a list of 26 additional villages that they said were burned by Salwa Judum members.56 A petition filed in the Supreme Court of India estimates that between June 2005 and August 2007 Salwa Judum members and government security forces killed 537 villagers, burned 2,825 houses, and looted many thousands of other houses in Dantewada and Bijapur districts.57

All the eyewitnesses to Salwa Judum padyatras (rallies) in their villages stated that these were violent events aimed at either enlisting their participation in Salwa Judum meetings or relocating them to camps.58 The coercive tactics ranged from threatening and imposing fines, to beating, abducting, and killing villagers, and burning and looting hamlets (See Appendix I).

According to some villagers, during Salwa Judum’s most active period, between June 2005 and the monsoon season of 2007 (June to September), Salwa Judum members and government security forces conducted raids on their villages at least two or three times every month, and sometimes every day. Eyewitnesses estimated that they came in numbers varying from 50 to 2,000.59 For instance, describing the number of people who raided his village, one local resident pointed to a field approximately the size of a soccer field and said, “this entire field was filled with them [Salwa Judum members and government security forces].”60 During such raids Salwa Judum members were usually armed with sticks, axes, daggers, spears, and bows and arrows, while government security forces were armed with rifles.61 

Sometimes the raid was preceded by a mandatory Salwa Judum public meeting. Explaining why her family members attended Salwa Judum meetings, Vasanti Kumar said,

Judum people told them [family members] that everyone should go for the meeting or else they will have to pay a fine of 500 rupees [roughly US$12] for each member in the family. My sisters and mother had no money so two of my sisters went for the meeting.62

A woman from Kothooru described how Salwa Judum members and government security forces came to her village, beat her, and forcibly took her to a Salwa Judum meeting.63 Another woman from Neeram attended a meeting because Salwa Judum leaders had given a letter to a local sarpanch stating that if they did not come, then their village would be attacked.64 One villager from Nambi described how Salwa Judum and government security forces went to the weekly market and intimidated villagers into attending meetings or relocating to camps.65

In these public meetings, Salwa Judum leaders appealed to villagers to join Salwa Judum to fight Naxalites. A teenage boy who attended the public meeting in Basaguda in June 2006 recounted the speeches at these meetings:

[They used to say,] “We [Salwa Judum] won’t keep Naxalites in this country. We will chase them away to another country. We will all form Salwa Judum together and chase Naxalites. Come and stay with us in the camps to help us fight Naxalites.”66

Sometimes senior police officials, administrative officials, and politicians attended these meetings.67

In some cases Salwa Judum members took away children and adults (both male and female) to attend meetings. In some others they took away only men and boys, leaving behind women, girls, and young children. Sometimes people who were forcibly taken to attend meetings were prevented from returning—to force the family to relocate to Salwa Judum camps. Explaining how the men who were taken away did not return, Mihika said,

I waited for my husband to come back but he did not return at all. He was taken to the camp [by Salwa Judum] about two years ago [in 2005]. So I ran away and came towards [name of place withheld] thinking it would be safer here.68

Mihika left her village and moved to another village with her five children who were all under age eight. She did not know where her husband was for a long time. She said that her husband eventually managed to escape from the camp and came looking for his family.69 Several other people interviewed by Human Rights Watch described similar experiences.70 Kaskul Naiyya said,

They [Salwa Judum and CRPF] forced all the men to go with them [for the meeting], including boys. Judum took away boys his age [pointing to a boy who said he was about age 13] as well. If there were no male members in the house, then they would take the woman from that house. The people they took did not return home.71

Naiyya’s brother, age 17, who was forcibly taken away along with her uncle to attend a meeting, returned after a few days and told them that they had been taken to a Salwa Judum camp. But her uncle was prevented from returning.72

Salwa Judum members harassed villagers who did not voluntarily relocate to camps. For instance, one strategy was to cut off villagers’ access to the weekly market.73 One villager said,

People from Neeram are not allowed to cross the [Indravati] river anymore—even to go to the market. They have to go all the way to Naranyanpur market, which is a two-and-a-half-days’ walk.74

A villager from Lingagiri described how after a Salwa Judum meeting in Lingagiri in early 2006, government security forces asked all villagers who had not relocated to the Basaguda camp to report at the police station every day. He said,

After the meeting, we had to go to Basaguda police station everyday. One member from each family had to go everyday and report that we are still there [and had not joined the Naxalites]. The timing for reporting was fixed—around 8 to 9 a.m. If we didn’t go, the other villagers would be questioned and when we went the next time we would get threatened and beaten by Salwa Judum members. Even if we were sick we had to go and report in the police station if we didn’t want to get beaten the next time.75

Typically, if villagers refused to relocate to camps despite threats and harassment, then Salwa Judum members and government security forces used other coercive techniques—they terrorized civilians by beating or abducting them, taking away their livestock, and burning huts and at times entire villages.

Raids on villages usually came without warning. “As soon as Salwa Judum members and CRP people [CRPF] entered the village, they started beating people and setting huts on fire. They didn’t make any announcements or give any orders [to vacate the village],” said Vachcham Ragu from Sankanpalli.76

Describing an attack by Salwa Judum and government security forces on Pidmel, one villager said,

Judum came to my village along with SPOs [special police officers] for the first time in summer last year [2006]. They came and surrounded the entire village. Some of us managed to run into the jungle before they surrounded the village and some got caught. Those who got caught got beaten severely. They came three times to our village. First two times they beat people. The first time they came they also burned eight huts. My hut was not burned. Though they took away all the livestock—the poultry and goats. I lost three goats. They also looted all my utensils, our clothes, blankets, and barrels.77

In many cases Salwa Judum members along with government security forces killed civilians and raped women to terrorize them and force relocation. Human Rights Watch received reports from villagers of approximately 55 killings of family members, friends, or acquaintances but was not able to independently verify every case.78 While most villagers typically fled at the first sign of a Salwa Judum raid, they sometimes returned to their villages to find bodies of people who were not able to escape.

A villager from Kamarguda explained how he cremated others from his village, and fled for safety:

There were around 50 huts in my village and all were burned by Salwa Judum members and police. They also killed three people—slit open their throats. [When we were fleeing] they [Salwa Judum members and government security forces] caught them [others from his village] in the jungle and then took them. Don’t know where. I don’t know where they killed them; maybe they killed them in the police station. But later we found their bodies in the Jagargonda jungle. Some of us found the bodies and cremated them. We found Mandavi Podiya’s (age 70), Mandavi Budra’s (age 40), and Mandavi Unga’s (age 30) bodies. I left the next day.79

Villagers from Mukudtong described a raid on their village “immediately before dusshera [an Indian festival in September-October] in 2006”:

Judum and police came to our village. They came in three or four trucks, and many more on foot.… Came and burned our village—about six huts were set on fire. The very first time they came, they came early in the morning—something like 4 a.m. They first burned some huts and then announced that if we did not vacate our village and go to Injeram camp this would be the fate of everyone in the village, and that they would burn all the huts .… They also beat the sarpanch [village official] and the poojari [priest]. They beat others also. The people who came to our village had bows and arrows, sticks, and the police had rifles. From our village they also raped [name withheld] (about age 20). They raped her and left her in the village itself.80

Salwa Judum members came back again and burned their entire village. They continued,

Judum members came again after a month in the afternoon. This time they killed Madkam Adma (age 50). They shot him and stabbed him. Adma was in his house when this happened. They burned the entire village. The second time people came on foot only—Judum with SPOs and CRP police [CPRF]. SPOs were wearing police uniforms.81

The villagers said Mukudtong was not close to the road, making access difficult. Villages that were close to the roads had it worse, they said:

In Kotacheru they used to go almost every day because it was very close to the road. They killed five to six people. One of them was the patel [village headman]. His name was also Madkam Adma. We don’t know the other names. [We heard that] they [Salwa Judum members and government security forces] raped many women from Kotacheru but we know only one of them who was raped—her name is [name withheld] (about age 22).82

Villagers also reported that Salwa Judum members abducted many people from markets and took them to camps. One villager from Toodayem said,

I had gone to the Matwada bazaar one day last year [2006] and Judum people saw me in the bazaar, caught me, and started beating me. They beat me with chappals [slippers] and lathis [sticks] on my face and back. I have lost my hearing in one ear after this. They kept screaming “Sala [derogatory term] you are with Naxalites and you are supplying them with food.” And they were saying to each other “Let’s slit his throat and throw him in the gutter.” They dragged me to the Bhairamgarh camp. I had no extra clothes or food.83

Another villager from Tolnai said Salwa Judum members abducted around 15 people from his village who had gone to the weekly market in Errabore during the harvest season in 2006, and took them to Konta camp. 84

In some cases, villagers “disappeared” after they were forcibly taken away by Salwa Judum members or government security forces: their relatives had no further information about them. Kadti Gowri from Nendra said that in February 2006 Salwa Judum members and government security forces forcibly took her to Errabore camp along with three others—her son-in-law, and his brother and father. The last she saw them was near a river behind Errabore camp. She said that she had searched for them, had not found them, and still did not know their whereabouts at the time of her interview with Human Rights Watch in December 2007. She fears that Salwa Judum members or government security forces may have killed them.85 

B.  Coercing camp residents’ participation in Salwa Judum

Not only were villagers forcibly evicted from their villages and moved into camps, but once in the camps, they were coerced into participating in Salwa Judum’s activities, which included attending meetings, going on processions, and even raiding other villages. One former resident of Mirtur camp narrated the trauma of camp residents:

All able-bodied men had to participate in all Salwa Judum’s processions—even 12-year-olds had to participate in Salwa Judum’s meetings.… We had to also go with them to burn our own village. We could not say no because then we would get beaten brutally. We were very scared of them and were sure that we will be beaten if we refused to go with them on such processions. They used to also force us to carry weapons on these processions. And the people who did not go got beaten severely.86

A former resident of Errabore camp described the hierarchy and rules in the camp. She said,

When Judum members want to go to a village or have a meeting, … the sarpanch either asks everyone to go or says that one member from each family [at the camp] should go. My father used to go from our family. When they announce that villagers should go with them to other villages, they also announce that whoever is going should carry weapons with them—whatever they have in their homes—axes, sickles, sticks, whatever. If some family does not go for these meetings or rallies, then the supply of provisions to the family is cut off. 87

Another former resident of Geedam camp (now Kasoli camp) complained,

During that time [our stay in the camp], the government did not give us anything to eat—no [food] rations—nothing. On top of that, they would ask us to go for meetings and rallies. Imagine being hungry and going for these meetings. Some people refused and got beaten severely. All youngsters, that is, able-bodied men were supposed to go for these meetings and we had no choice.88

One resident from Jailbada camp tried to escape but was caught, brought back to the camp, and forced to attend Salwa Judum’s meetings and rallies. Narrating how he was routinely harassed, he said,

[W]hen I tried going back, the police caught me, brought me back, and beat me. I have to go for meetings and rallies with Judum members. If I do not participate, then they [government security forces] drag me out of the house and say “Go back to your village” and force me to leave; or they threaten to beat me. Then if I go back [to the village], they come looking for me, beat me, and bring me back.89

C.  Salwa Judum reprisals against villagers who leave camps

Many camp residents return to their villages during the day to restore their homes and cultivation. Some flee from the camps and attempt to return to their villages permanently.

Salwa Judum leaders from Dantewada told Human Rights Watch that “villagers are free to go wherever they want.”90 Several government officials also stated that camp residents are free to leave and return to their villages. The Dantewada Superintendent of Police Rahul Sharma assured Human Rights Watch:

It [the camp] is not a concentration camp and no one is forced to come here. People have been living in the camps for the last two years, but hardly anyone has gone back to their villages. It’s all free. Anyone who wants to, can leave. They stay because of the government services.91

Another police officer from Dantewada stated,

We advise villagers not to go to their villages out of concern for their security. If they tell us in advance that they want to go, we will provide them with escorts. We go with them whenever they want to celebrate festivals in villages. But when they go to the villages without telling us it becomes a problem.92

The Dantewada district collector said the same, “People in the camps are free to go back to their villages, free to go anywhere at any time.”93

These statements were contradicted by many camp residents who described reprisals for attempting to return to their villages. Salwa Judum members and government security forces have carried out reprisal measures against villagers who left camps. One former resident of Mirtur camp said that any attempt to leave the camp was viewed with suspicion. He said,

People were not allowed to go to their villages. If we went to our villages and came back then we were beaten. If there was an attack on police anywhere, then we would get beaten. Judum leaders and SPOs beat us. They would call us for a meeting and when we were in the meeting they would start beating us. We used to get beaten severely at least once every week. They used to beat us with big sticks. Only the men were beaten and they used to say that we were also part of the group that attacked the police.94

These reprisals are ongoing. Describing a Salwa Judum attack on their village a week earlier in December 2007, the former resident from Mirtur camp said:

Last Monday, Judum members came to our village and burned all the grain that we had harvested. They also beat a woman—they beat her with an axe. Even after we left the camp, Judum members used to keep coming to our village and take away our livestock. We do not stay in our village. We keep going back and forth between [village name withheld] and [village name withheld] to avoid Salwa Judum whenever they come.95

Some residents who went to their village every morning to cultivate their fields described an attack on them in December 2007,

Salwa Judum members from another village came a week ago and started beating people. They said, “We are staying in camps far from our villages. You are staying close to your village and go back and earn a livelihood [by cultivating your fields]. But we can’t do the same.”  They threatened to pull roofs off the houses in the camp. The police, Salwa Judum, SPOs—all came. SPOs and CRP people [CRPF] beat us. They came in a large number—looked like a thousand. They beat 12 to 15 people.96

D.  Salwa Judum reprisals against villagers who have fled to Andhra Pradesh

Salwa Judum and government security forces also cross over to Andhra Pradesh searching for people from Chhattisgarh who have settled there. In one case, they went to a village in Andhra Pradesh and abducted two men who had fled and settled there in February 2006. Eyewitnesses to the incident said that Irma Madan and Irma Vandan are brothers who were residing with them in the hamlet. Madan went to Surpanguda (in Dantewada district) in October 2007 to meet his cousin. His cousin then brought Salwa Judum members and government security forces to their village (in Warangal district) in search of Madan and his brother. The villagers said,

Around November 14 or 15 [2007], his cousin came along with Salwa Judum and police. About 40 or 60 Salwa Judum and police came at night—7 or 7:30 p.m. Police stayed at the checkpost. He [the cousin] came to the village with Salwa Judum. Salwa Judum people stood over there [pointing to a location about 100 yards away]. He walked into the village with a bag and asked for Madan, and met him. Then he asked to go to the toilet and when he went out he came back with Salwa Judum people. They surrounded Madan and took him. Then they did the same to his brother. All the villagers were alerted only as Madan’s wife started screaming. They left their wives and children behind and only dragged away the men … The brothers fell at the feet of Salwa Judum people and begged not to be taken but they were beaten and dragged. We couldn’t go to their rescue because there were so many of them and we were so few of us. We were also very scared—Salwa Judum was armed with machetes and knives, and the police had big guns…. We still don’t know what happened to them.97

The fear of reprisals is so high that people who have settled on the Andhra Pradesh side said that they hide and run when they see Salwa Judum members. A member of a group of displaced persons said,

We have seen Judum and can even identify some of them because they are from neighboring villages from Chhattisgarh. These people usually come on motorcycles or in autos [rickshaws] and cover their faces with towels—so we cannot tell whether they are SPOs or Salwa Judum because sometimes SPOs also wear clothes like ours.98

One of the displaced persons continued,

Judum members identified me and asked me where I live. I told them that I do not live here and I come here for agricultural labor and go back. I did not want to tell them where I lived because I was scared they would come here and do the same thing. This happened one month ago [in November 2007].99




49 Human Rights Forum, “Death, Displacement and Deprivation: The War in Dantewara: A Report,” 2006, http://cpjc.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/hrfdantewadareport.pdf (accessed October 2, 2007),  p. 26; Independent Citizen’s Initiative, “War in the Heart of India, An Enquiry into the Ground Situation in Dantewada District, Chhattisgarh,” 2006, http://rightsandresources.org/blog/WarintheHeartofIndia.pdf (accessed July 16, 2007),  pp. 21-22; Human Rights Watch interview with Pottem Satish (pseudonym), former resident of Errabore camp, location withheld, December 6, 2007. Satish told Human Rights Watch that sarpanches (heads of elected village councils) and “influential people” are made camp leaders.  

50 Human Rights Watch interviews with K. R. Pisda, district collector of Dantewada district, Dantewada, December 10, 2007; Rahul Sharma, superintendent of police of Dantewada district, Dantewada, December 10, 2007 ( first interview); Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, “Annual Report 2006-2007,” http://mha.nic.in/pdfs/ar0607-Eng.pdf (accessed May 13, 2008), p. 24. The report describes Salwa Judum as a “voluntary and peaceful initiative by local people against naxalites in Dantewada district [undivided] of Chhattisgarh.”     

51 Nandini Sundar and others v. State of Chhattisgarh, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 250 of 2007, Counter Affidavit on Behalf of Respondent, January 22, 2008, pp. 308-9, para. 8; Sur-Rejoinder on Behalf of Respondent State of Chhattisgarh, April 10, 2008, p. 513, para. 4a.

52 Nitu Jain, “UPA wants C’garh anti-Naxalite village militia disbanded,” video report, IBN Live Video, March 18, 2008, http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/61451/upa-wants-cgarh-antinaxal-village-militia-disbanded.html (accessed March 18, 2008).  In an interview with IBN Live, a leading Indian news and current affairs channel, the chairperson of the Administrative Reforms Commission, Veerappa Moily, said, “Salwa Judum will amount to being an extra-constitutional power which you cannot have,” and further implied that Salwa Judum was in fact acting as the agent of the state. He continued, “[i]f there is a constitutional government, it is the duty of the constitutional government to function, [and] not delegate its power [to Salwa Judum].” Ibid.

53 UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), “International Law—The Core International Human Rights Instruments,” undated, http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/index.htm#core (accessed April 20, 2008). Seven of the nine core international treaties are in force. India is party to four of the seven core treaties that are in force—the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 49, UN Doc. A/6316 (1966), 993 U.N.T.S. 3, entered into force January 3, 1976, acceded to by India on April 10, 1979; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, UN Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, acceded to by India on April 10, 1979; the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), adopted November 20, 1989, G.A. Res. 44/25, annex, 44 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 167, UN Doc. A/44/49 (1989), entered into force September 2, 1990, acceded to by India on December 11, 1992; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), adopted December 18, 1979, G.A. Res. 34/180, 34 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 46) at 193, UN Doc. A/34/46, entered into force September 3, 1981, ratified by India on July 9, 1993.

54 UN Human Rights Committee, “The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant (art. 2),” General Comment No. 31, UN Doc. CCPR/C/74/CRP.4/Rev.6, March 29, 2004, para. 8.

55 Philip Alston, “Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions,” E/CN.4/2005/7, December 22, 2004, http://www.extrajudicialexecutions.org/reports/E_CN_4_2005_7.pdf (accessed April 15, 2008), para. 72.

56 Chintagupha, Jinetong, Nilamadgu, Dongrigudem, Ethuguppa, Mukram, Singaram, Nillampalli, Penta, Baiyampalli, Parlagatta, Tolewarti, Kursangal, Kariguda, Gondupalli, Kondasawali, Gorkha, Kotacheru, Nagaram, Bandaras, Gaganapalli, Gomapad, Regadgatta, Maraiguda, Tetrai, and Arlampalli.

57 Kartam Joga and others v.State of Chhattisgarh and Union of India, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 119 of 2007.

58 Fifty-two eyewitnesses from 18 different villages described Salwa Judum rallies and recounted threats, abductions, beatings, killings, rape, pillage, and village burnings in their hamlets—Sankanpalli, Durma, Darbha, Nambi, Kamarguda, Surpanguda, Boreguda, Nayapara, Lingagiri, Kothooru, Pisheypara, Etagatta, Nendra, Ramavaram, Pidmel, Tolnai, Mukudtong, and Sunnamguda.

59 Human Rights Watch interview with numerous displaced persons from different villages in Dantewada and Bijapur districts who witnessed raids by Salwa Judum and government security forces, Warangal and Khammam districts, November 29-December 8, 2007. In their descriptions, these individuals gave different numbers for Salwa Judum members and government security forces who raided their village.

60 Human Rights Watch group interview GR1 with residents (who chose to remain anonymous), B1 permanent housing site, Dantewada district, December 15, 2007.

61 Human Rights Watch interview with numerous displaced persons from different villages in Dantewada and Bijapur districts who were victims of raids by Salwa Judum members and government security forces, Warangal and Khammam districts, November 29-December 8, 2007. These victims were consistent in their description of the nature of weapons carried by Salwa Judum members and government security forces.

62 Human Rights Watch interview with Vasanti Kumar (pseudonym), IDP from Pandiguda, location withheld, December 6, 2007. 

63 Human Rights Watch interview with Sita (pseudonym), IDP from Kothooru, village K1, Khammam district, December 1, 2007.

64 Human Rights Watch interview with Mandavi Siddharth (pseudonym), person displaced from Neeram, location withheld, December 11, 2007.

65 Human Rights Watch interview with Kalma Pandu (pseudonym), IDP from Nambi, village W7, Warangal district, December 1, 2007.

66 Human Rights Watch interview with teenage boy (who chose to remain anonymous), IDP from Basaguda, village K2, Khammam district, December 2, 2007.

67 Human Rights Watch interviews with T-1 (who chose to remain anonymous), government teacher in Bijapur, location withheld, December 14, 2007; IDP-1 from Lingagiri (who chose to remain anonymous), village K1, Khammam district, December 1, 2007; Santosh Poonyem, Bijapur district chief bureau for Dainik Prakhar Samachar (Hindi newspaper), Bijapur, December 14, 2007.

68 Human Rights Watch interview with Mihika (pseudonym), location withheld, December 11, 2007.

69 Ibid.

70 Human Rights Watch interviews with Madkam Dhairya (pseudonym), camp resident, Jailbada camp, December 13, 2007; camp resident (who chose to remain anonymous), Dornapal camp, December 12, 2007. 

71 Human Rights Watch interview with Kaskul Naiyya (pseudonym), IDP from Nayapara, village K3, Khammam district, December 2, 2007. The Central Reserve Police Force or CRPF is a paramilitary police force deployed by the Indian central government in the region.

72 Ibid.

73 Human Rights Watch interview with Kosambi Mukesh (pseudonym), IDP from Durma, village W6, Warangal district, November 30, 2007.

74 Human Rights Watch interview with Mandavi Siddharth (pseudonym), person displaced from Neeram, location withheld, December 11, 2007.

75 Human Rights Watch interview with IDP-1 from Lingagiri (who chose to remain anonymous), village K1, Khammam district, December 1, 2007.

76 Human Rights Watch interview with Vachcham Ragu (pseudonym), IDP from Sankanpalli, village W4, Warangal district, November 30, 2007. 

77 Human Rights Watch interview with Tati Dhiren (pseudonym), IDP from Pidmel, village K8, Khammam district, December 6, 2007. See above, section III, Background, for additional information regarding SPOs.

78 Human Rights Watch interviews with numerous displaced persons from different villages in Dantewada and Bijapur districts who were victims of raids by Salwa Judum and government security forces, Warangal and Khammam districts, November 29-December 8, 2007. See Appendix I for list of villages from where IDPs reported killings.

79 Human Rights Watch interview with Irma Gokul (pseudonym), IDP from Kamarguda, village W7, Warangal district, December 1, 2007. 

80 Human Rights Watch interview with Vadtam Veera and Vadtam Cheena (pseudonyms), IDPs from Mukudtong, village K10, Khammam district, December 7, 2007.

81 Ibid.

82 Ibid. Note that this Madkam Adma is a different individual from the Madkam Adma named in the previous account. It is not unusual for villagers to have identical names.

83 Human Rights Watch interview with Madavi Abhinay (pseudonym), IDP from Toodayam, village K9, Khammam district, December 11, 2007.

84 Human Rights Watch group interview GR4 with IDPs from Tolnai (who chose to remain anonymous), village K9, Khammam district, December 7, 2007.

85 Human Rights Watch interview with Kadti Gowri (pseudonym), IDP from Nendra, village K11, Khammam district, December 8, 2007.

86 Human Rights Watch group interview GR3 with former residents of Mirtur camp (who chose to remain anonymous), other details withheld.

87 Human Rights Watch interview with Poosam Kanya (pseudonym), former resident of Errabore camp, location withheld, December 5, 2007.

88 Human Rights Watch interview with Mandavi Siddharth (pseudonym), person displaced from Neeram, location withheld, December 11, 2007.

89 Human Rights Watch interview with camp resident (who chose to remain anonymous), Jailbada camp, December 13, 2007.

90 Human Rights Watch interview with Ram Bhuwan Khushwaha, Salwa Judum leader of Dornapal camp, Dornapal, date withheld; Soyam Muka, Salwa Judum leader of Errabore camp, date withheld.

91 Human Rights Watch interview with Rahul Sharma, first interview, December 10, 2007.

92 Human Rights Watch interview with police officer-1 (who requested anonymity), other details withheld.

93 Human Rights Watch interview with K. R. Pisda, district collector of Dantewada district, Dantewada, December 10, 2007.

94 Human Rights Watch group interview GR3 with former residents of Mirtur camp (who chose to remain anonymous), other details withheld.

95 Ibid.

96 Human Rights Watch group interview GR1 with residents (who chose to remain anonymous), B1 permanent housing site, Dantewada district, December 15, 2007.

97 Human Rights Watch group interview with numerous displaced persons from different villages in Dantewada and Bijapur districts who witnessed the abduction, village W7, Warangal district, December 1, 2007.

98 Human Rights Watch group interview GR4 with IDPs from Tolnai (who chose to remain anonymous), village K9, Khammam district, December 7, 2007.

99 Ibid.