By Aijaz Zaka Syed
12 August, 2007
Countercurrents.org
Like most people in the Indian subcontinent, I grew up on a heavy dose of Bollywood. Sanjay Dutt never left a mark on an impressionable mind though. For the people of my generation, born and brought up in the age of Amitabh Bachchan, no other star appeared bright enough to bedazzle us.
Nevertheless, the spectacle of a distraught Sanjay Dutt desperately clinging on to his sisters and waving nervously at the throng of fans and onlookers was curiously moving; decidedly more touching than the emotional scenes from some of his movies.
No one ever accused Sanjay Dutt of being an exceptionally gifted actor even though he carries a formidable legacy on his shoulders as the son of two celebrated Bollywood legends.
But is he an equally bad human being? It was rather disconcerting to see the actor, one of the highest paid stars of the world's biggest film industry, being paraded like a common thug.
This is not to argue that Dutt deserves a special treatment because of his celebrity status. A crime is a crime, no matter who has committed it, right? And if the actor has indeed committed the crime he has been accused of, he has to pay for it. Simple as that.
In fact, all those responsible for the 1993 Bombay blasts that killed more than 200 innocent people deserve the punishment, if they indeed had a role to play in the attacks.
The Indian government and the state government of Maharashtra deserve kudos for going after those who targeted Bombay and all that it represented as the financial and cultural capital of the country.
We are indebted to the state and the judiciary, especially, Justice P D Kode for "bringing the terrorists to justice," as president Bush would have it. It only goes to show how efficient India's law enforcement agencies are. The proverbial long arm of the law eventually catches up with the criminals no matter how long it takes.
The conviction of a hundred people including Dutt after 15 long years proves justice is eventually done in the world's biggest democracy. Wheels of justice may take their time to move but they do move.
And since the perpetrators of the March 1993 attacks have been brought to justice, one assumes that those responsible for similar carnage at a much larger scale only a couple of months earlier –- in December 1992 to be precise –- have been brought to justice too.
In case we have all forgotten, the month-and-half long pogrom following the demolition of Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992 killed more than 2000 Muslims in Bombay alone, in addition to destroying the homes, businesses and economic infrastructure of the minority community.
The marauding mobs led by Shiv Sena thugs unleashed a reign of terror on the city that is rightly celebrated as the microcosm of India.
Muslims, grieving over the destruction of the mosque that had come to symbolise their very future in the country, were butchered like animals for more than a month by the Shiv Sena gangs and their other saffron cousins. And Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, India's answer to Nero, who had presided over the destruction of the mosque at Ayodhya, continued to fiddle with the characteristic diligence.
The federal government never stirred out of its reverie to pull up the state government of Sudhakar Rao Naik who was busy settling old scores with his rival Sharad Pawar.
And Pawar, the minister of defence and a contender for the top job in the land, with his eye on both Delhi and Bombay, played his own games.
Meanwhile Bombay continued to burn –- with its utterly helpless and defenceless Muslims. And the Nero in Delhi continued to fiddle. The dance of death raged on for weeks leaving permanent scars on Bombay and its once fabled cosmopolitan people. So it's just as well that Shiv Sena chief Thackeray decided to change the city's name to Mumbai. After all, he played a critical role in turning Bombay into Mumbai.
So today as India's law enforcement agencies are patting themselves for finally bringing the perpetrators of Bombay 1993 to justice, it is only fair to ask where are those who planned the Bombay of 1992? Have the killers who raped and mutilated the Bombay of 1992 been made to pay for their crimes?
The question is relevant because what took place in Bombay in January 1993 is inextricably linked to what happened in Bombay in December 1992. It is hardly a secret now that the seeds of 1993 attacks –- despicable and totally indefensible as they had been –- were sowed in 1992. It's the same hoary principle of 'cause and effect' that is at work in the whole universe had been at work here as well.
In fact, Sanjay Dutt's implication in the 1993 blasts case is seen as a retribution for the courageous role his father Sunil Dutt played in helping Muslim victims during the 1992 riots. Sunil Dutt, may God bless his soul, a Congress MP and truly liberal face of India, risked his own life to protect the besieged minority community.
As the Justice Sri Krishna Commission, headed by a conscientious judge, concluded, there was a direct link between the 'minority response' and 'majority terrorism'. It was the terrorism of the Hindutva brigade and the Indian state's failure to stop it that led to the terror attacks for which Justice Kode has just punished nearly hundred people.
Interestingly, the Sri Krishna Commission was mandated to examine both the anti-Muslim pogrom of December 1992 and terror strikes of 1993. Justice Sri Krishna –- may his tribe grow –- presented his findings to the state government two years ago despite the obstacles that were put in his way and the harassment he suffered at the hands of the Shiv Sena-BJP government in Maharashtra.
While the political establishment has acted resolutely in meting out justice to those responsible for the outrage of January 1993, it has been enigmatically silent on the original sin of December 1992? So where is the Sri Krishna Commission's report? Whatever happened to its recommendations? Why aren't they implemented? And why are the governments of Maharashtra and India — both headed by the Congress party — silent on this?
I have always been proud of my identity as an Indian, just as I take pride in my Muslim profile. I take pride in the fact that Muslims during their thousand year-long association with India have toiled and shed their blood with their Hindu brethren to make this land a great country to live in. The Muslims have as much at stake in India as everyone else. Regardless of what Hindutva zealots have to say, we love this country as much as we love our faith.
And we would like to believe that this great land, fabled for its traditions of tolerance and justice, wouldn't tolerate two standards for justice — one for the majority and one for the minority.
There can't be two criteria of justice. While Dutt has been jailed for six years for merely keeping a gun at his home to protect himself, those responsible for the killing of two thousand helpless people continue to roam free.
Next door, in Gandhiji's Gujarat, Narendra Modi remains in power despite being condemned by the world community as the architect of another anti-Muslim pogrom. Modi continues to ridicule India's traditions of non-violence, peaceful co-existence and respect for all faiths.
Getting back to Bombay, action against those responsible for the 1993 outrage is welcome, even if it's done under a draconian law like Tada under which you are guilty until proven innocent; and even if questions have been raised about the justness of the system under which they have been prosecuted.
But bring those responsible for the shame of 1992 to account too. You do not have to look far to find them. They are right there in Bombay (I can never bring myself to call it Mumbai!) and everyone, including the powers that be, knows them. For justice, as Eleanor Roosevelt argued, cannot be for one side but must be for both.
And if you fail to administer justice, you create new opportunities for injustice. For injustice is always followed by greater injustice. Like night follows the day.
Aijaz Zaka Syed writes a weekly column on the Middle East and Muslim world affairs. He can be reached at aijazsyed@khaleejtimes.com
|
