Oting killing: Nagaland govt challenges Centre’s refusal to prosecute army personnel

The Supreme Court on Monday (July 15) issued notices to the home and defence ministries while hearing a writ petition filed by the Nagaland government challenging the Centre’s refusal to sanction the prosecution of Indian Army personnel involved in the 2021 Oting massacre.

Oting massacre

In a massacre that the Indian Army claims to be a case of mistaken identity, a unit of 21^st Para Special Forces on December 4, 2021, killed six civilians in an ambush near the village of Oting in Nagaland’s Mon district. The Army later claimed that the incident was the fallout of an intelligence failure and the personnel mistook the civilians for Naga insurgents.

Eight more civilians and an army personnel were killed in violence that broke out in the aftermath of the firing.

Reports quoting court documents said, the state government filed its plea on April 16 and the same was verified on July 11.

On Monday, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra held a fresh hearing for its admission.

The case has been listed for hearing on September 3.

What the plea says?

The Nagaland government in its plea said the Centre refuses to prosecute 30 Army personnel responsible for the massacre even though an FIR was filed into the incident and a Centre-constituted Special Investigation Team (SIT) submitted its report on the killings.

“The Department of Military Affairs under the Ministry of Defence has denied sanction to prosecute 30 Army personnel who were allegedly found involved in the December 2021 firing incident in the Nagaland’s Oting village in which 13 civilians were killed including six mine workers and the remaining seven who intercepted the vehicles containing the dead bodies of the victims,” said the plea presented before the bench by Advocate General KN Balagopal.

“Pursuant to the same, an FIR was registered and the government constituted an SIT which conducted detailed investigation and submitted the report. However, the central government declines to prosecute the army officers concerned for reasons mentioned in the sanction order,” said a press release issued by Balagopal.

‘Army officer dismissed local intelligence’

The plea alleges that the army officer leading the mission went ahead with the ambush even though a source cautioned one of the soldiers that “the underground factions are not in Tiru Bridge but are now operating from the Wapnyu side which is a different location.”

“In spite of the caution, he went ahead with the operation resulting in the killing of six mine workers, seven villagers and injuring 14,” the petition says.

In its plea, named Naga People’s Movement for Human Rights (NPMHR) v Union of India, the Nagaland government said the Centre’s refusal to sanction the prosecution of the 30 army personnel allegedly involved is subject to judicial review. It says that officers who “exceeded limits prescribed under the Act (Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958) can be prosecuted and compensation must be given to victims”.

“The wife of one of the officers has filed a petition for quashing the SIT report and in the course of the proceedings the central government declined sanction to the state authorities from proceeding against the army personnel that necessitated the present petition for setting aside the refusal of sanction order,” the petition said.