urpatwant Singh Pannun, a New York-based attorney and General Counsel of Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), has taken legal action against the Indian government and senior officials of its intelligence agency, Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. Federal District Court, alleging that Indian officials conspired to assassinate him, a U.S. citizen, on American soil. This unprecedented action aims to hold Indian officials accountable for their transnational repression efforts. The legal announcement was made during a global press conference, where Pannun and his legal team laid out the case against senior Indian officials, including Ajit Doval, Samant Goel, Vikram Yadav, and Nikhil Gupta.
Allegations Against Indian Government
According to the complaint, senior officials within India’s RAW, directly reporting to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, engaged a weapons trafficker and RAW agent, Nikhil Gupta, to orchestrate Pannun’s assassination. Gupta reportedly hired hitmen to carry out the murder in New York, but the scheme was thwarted when the hired individuals turned out to be undercover federal agents. The complaint further claims that this was part of a broader strategy by the Indian government to eliminate prominent Sikh activists advocating for Sikh self-determination in Punjab and speaking against the persecution of religious minorities.
Read More: U.S. Indicts Indian National in “Murder for Hire” Plot Targeting Sikh Activist
The alleged plot against Pannun is linked to a larger campaign targeting Sikh activists globally. This campaign includes the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a close ally of Pannun, in Canada in June 2023. The assassination of Nijjar and the attempt on Pannun’s life are said to be part of India’s efforts to silence pro-Khalistan voices abroad.
Context of Transnational Repression
The broader context of this legal action includes a history of repression faced by Sikh activists. The complaint highlights the long-standing Indian government policy of suppressing dissent through violent means. It traces these tactics back to historical events like the June 1984 military attack on the Golden Temple, the Sikh Genocide of November 1984, and numerous instances of arbitrary detention, torture, and extrajudicial executions. Sikh activists advocating for the Khalistan Referendum have been particular targets, facing severe repression both within and outside India.
Attorney Pannun was reportedly targeted around the same time Nijjar was assassinated in Canada. The U.S. Department of Justice has indicted Gupta on charges of “murder for hire,” while Canada has also arrested and charged four Indian nationals in connection with Nijjar’s murder. The complaint alleges that the Indian government has been actively involved in orchestrating these plots, although it denies responsibility.
Statements from Pannun and His Legal Team
In response to the assassination attempt, Pannun has vowed to continue his activism for the Khalistan Referendum, despite India’s efforts to intimidate and eliminate him. “The Government of India cannot stop the Khalistan Referendum through threats and intimidation,” Pannun stated, expressing his determination to pursue the cause of Punjab’s independence from India.
His legal team, including Matthew Borden of BraunHagey & Borden LLP and Richard J. Rogers from Global Diligence LLP, emphasized the significance of holding India accountable. Borden commented on the importance of protecting free speech and the rule of law in the U.S. “When a foreign government seeks to export tyranny and murder, our citizens have a right to seek redress in the courts,” he said. Rogers also criticized India’s history of attempts to silence Pannun, including abusing Interpol’s red notice system by falsifying evidence.
Pannun himself remains defiant in the face of continued threats from India. “I am aware Mr. Modi is still trying to kill me and trying to hire agents to eliminate me, but I will not stop at any cost,” he declared.
Legal Basis of the Case
The complaint filed in the U.S. District Court argues that the assassination attempt on Pannun is a clear violation of international law and U.S. sovereignty. The case is built on the premise that India’s actions are not just a violation of human rights but a direct challenge to the U.S. legal system. The court has jurisdiction over the claims against the named individuals, including Ajit Doval, Samant Goel, and Vikram Yadav, as well as Gupta. Additionally, the Government of India is held accountable under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
Although Prime Minister Modi has not been named in the lawsuit due to the immunity he enjoys as head of state, the lawsuit reserves the right to include him if his status changes during the proceedings. The case argues that India’s actions go beyond its borders, turning diplomatic missions into spy networks that intimidate Sikh activists worldwide.
Role of RAW
India’s extrajudicial killings and repression of Sikh activists abroad are part of a worrying trend, the complaint states. Investigations have revealed that RAW has been linked to more than 20 killings outside India since 2020, demonstrating the extent of India’s campaign against pro-Khalistan voices. The lawsuit portrays RAW as the driving force behind these assassination plots, working in coordination with senior officials who report directly to Prime Minister Modi.
The Guardian and Washington Post have published exposés, tying RAW to these extrajudicial killings and uncovering the inner workings of India’s covert operations. The lawsuit accuses India of systematically using violence and intimidation to silence dissent, both within its borders and abroad.
Pannun’s Pursuit for Justice
Pannun’s lawsuit seeks justice for the assassination attempt against him and for the larger pattern of transnational repression by India. The legal action highlights India’s persistent efforts to silence Sikh activism and calls for accountability for its human rights violations. As the case unfolds in the U.S. court, it will test the boundaries of international law and the principles of sovereignty.
The lawsuit also draws attention to India’s global campaign to quash dissent, shedding light on the broader implications of its actions for international human rights. For Pannun, the legal battle is not just about personal survival but about securing the right to advocate for self-determination without fear of violence or repression.
This article was received directly from the reporter.