The views of the Commission on the protection of human rights in areas subjected to terrorism and insurgency are well known and have been recorded in detail in earlier reports. The Commission is of the view that all elements of civil society must combine to fight the menace of terrorism. It is not a fight to be conducted by the armed forces and police alone. Instead, it must be fought at the political level, at the economic and aodal level, at the level of ideas. But, above all, it must be fwght in a manner that reapects human rights, whatever the difficulties this may entail for tho State and to those who are engaged in this task. The Commission believes that there must be full and uncompromising adherence to the provisions of the Constitution of our Republic, the laws of our land, and the treaty commitments to which our State is a party. The Commission has made clear that it will not countenance departures from this exacting standard. The sscurity of the State uan never be assured at the expense of the human dignity of those for whom the State exists. To the contrary, it is evident that respect for human rights must be an essential component in formulating any worthwhile policy of national security. 3.5 The Commission is therefore deeply disturbed when, In its view, there is a lack of 3.6 transparency in dealing with those who may have bean guilty of human rights violations. For instance, the Commission is yet to satisfy itself that Jwrtlcehas fully been done in regard to the tragic loss of life that occurred in Bijbehara, In the State of Jammu & Kashmir, on 22 October 1983 in respect of which incident it had made specific recommendations. After receiving a report of the Ministry of Home Affairs dated 12 February 1998 informing it of the outcome of the proceedings of the Staff Court of Inquiry (SCOI) and the proceedings of the trial held by the General Security Force Court (GSFC), the Commlssion considered it essential to call for the records of those proceedings before taking a final view on the matter. The Commission is determined to see this case through to its logical conclusion. At the end of the year under reporting, it was awiting the records of those proceedings and was contemplating moving a Writ Petition before the Supreme Court ifit were denied full access to the records that it had sought. The Commission is also deeply concerned that those responsible for the March 1996 3.7 abduction of Shri Jalil Andrabi, a prominent advocate of Srinagar and his subsequent killing, are yet to be brought to trial. The Commission itsell filed an application in respect of this mse before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir urging that an in-depth, transparent and honest investigation was mcessary. It also sought the permission of the Court to intervene and assist in this matter and presented the results of its own investigation to the Court. It is a matter of deep regret that the perpetrators have still not been brought to justice. The Commission considers this to be unacceptable. It urges greater seriousnese of purpose in the effort to track down and bring to book the abductors and killers of Jalil Andrabi. 3.8 The Commission visited Jarnrnu & Kaahmir In November 1998 for discussions with the