Cry for justice! Fresh Probe Ordered into Gujarat Carnage Cases

Ram Puniyani

The Supreme Court order of 25 March 2008 for fresh probes into some Gujarat riot cases, like Naroda Patia, Naroda, etc. comes as welcome relief in these dark times, when most of the time justice is conspicuous by its absence. In Gujarat, we witnessed the case of Zahira Sheikh being wrecked, the judiciary quietly watching and ignoring all the witnesses turning hostile, but preferring to accept the version of the state despite all the holes in its argument. It was the transfer of the case to Maharashtra that brought to light the truth. The same story was repeated in the case of Bilkis Bano. The transfer of cases away from the state gave some justice to her. Now, with the intervention of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and Teesta Setalvad, many other cases with tremendous bearing on the fate of justice for the victims will be reinvestigated properly.

By now it is crystal-clear that communal carnage is a total violation of democratic norms and laws. To begin with, some political forces that stand to benefit from this violence, the post-violence polarization and these political forces' consequent electoral strengthening look for a pretext to launch the carnage. By now the biases against minorities have become ingrained very deeply into the social psyche. Thus, during the carnage large sections of society come to believe that since the majority of victims are members of the minorities, what is going on is acceptable. A silent sanction for the violence prevails. This social, communal common sense against minorities makes the job of communalists easy, as the image of minorities has now been successfully demonized through various mechanisms, both globally and at home here in India.

As far as the political leadership is concerned, there are three types of attitudes. The first is seen at times when the ruling party workers lead the carnage from the front -- for example, the Delhi Anti Sikh massacre (Congress) or the Gujarat carnage (RSS combine). The second manifests itself when the leadership keeps quiet and lets the merchants of carnage do their job, as in Mumbai (1992-93), where Shiv Sena led the charge, the BJP assisted and the Congress (the party in power) watched. Most of the riots in India fall in this category. That is one of the reasons for the BJP trying to claim till the Gujarat violence that there are no riots when it rules. Some people bought this argument, and projected that the BJP is better than the Congress. And then Gujarat happened. Even in the majority of cases where the Congress ruled when violence took place, it was the BJP that was spearheading the violence while the Congress leadership was letting the violence take place, even when it could have put a stop to it. This is silent collusion.

In the third variety the political leadership ignores the issue, looking the other way when violence is on, and thereby lets the communal brigade do its job. Such was the case of the Samajvadi Party letting the communalists rampage freely in Mau in Uttar Pradesh. There is another variety too, the one favoured by communists. They have ensured that violence against minorities does not take place when they are ruling, but they have also not acted to prevent the communalization of minds, which is the base of communal riots. The CPM-led coalition in West Bengal or the Left coalition in Kerala falls in this category.

The role of the police is pretty much along a set pattern. Its partisan attitude has been demonstrated in most of the inquiry committee reports. It actively aids the rioters, as in Gujarat, or keeps quiet to let the rioters do their work, with its blessings. During the Mumbai violence, many Muslim victims said that they were capable of protecting themselves but for the police which shields the attackers and paralyses the Muslims. Both these roles are complementary. Research by a police officer, Dr. V.N. Rai, shows that no riot can go on beyond 48 hours unless it is blessed by the political leadership and supported by police officials. The bureaucracy also has powers which can put a stop to the violence but it prefers not to use these powers, as a large section of it is already busy using its powers in other directions.

During and after the violence, another role of the police comes to the fore: that of registering First Information Reports (FIRs). In such situations it prefers to believe in a 'forget it' policy by not registering FIRs as far as possible. If forced to register them, it ensures that there are sufficient clauses built into the FIR which would act as an escape route for the guilty. After this come the investigation done by police. Here again the work is deliberately meant to protect the guilty. It is at this stage that the SC has now intervened, and set up a committee with some upright officials from outside the state. In all such cases in Gujarat, it is by now clear that the communalized state apparatus is politically biased, and it is therefore impossible to obtain justice through its machinery. This is a glorious achievement of Hindu Rashtra's first state! Bravo Modi! Now one knows beyond any shadow of doubt as to why he is the darling of the RSS bosses and the heir-apparent of the current Prime Minister in waiting, Lal Krishna Advani!

The role of the police in particular has come under investigation in different inquiry commission reports -- the Madon Commission in the Bhivandi Jalgaon riots, the Jagmohan Reddy Commission in the Ahmedabad riots, the Vythyathil Commission in the Tellicherry riots, and the Shrikrisha Commission in the Mumbai riots. Most of these have pointed out that the police has without any exception aided and abetted the riots. These reports, meticulous and sincere to the core also highlight the rot that has infected the whole system, right from the political leadership and bureaucracy to the police. One significant observation is that most of the planning of the carnage has been done by one or the other affiliate of the RSS, which has also been taking the leading role.

Even the judiciary has not remained unaffected by the communal virus as witnessed in Gujarat. So by now, the basic dictum of a just society -- punish the guilty and protect the innocent -- is threatened. The recent step of the Supreme Court rekindles the hope that the process of degeneration of the justice delivery system may be halted at various stages. One has been waiting for years for justice for the victims of the anti-Sikh pogrom. One is also witnessing the deceptive attitude of the Maharashtra Government in the implementation of the Shrikrishna Commission report. In a shrewd and dishonest manner, it promised that the implementation of the report will be on the top of its agenda if elected to power. This election promise was made twice, but after winning it has been throwing dust in the eyes of victims and human rights activists by dodging the issue in one way or the other.

Gujarat is of course the worst case as far as justice delivery is concerned. With polarization along religious lines more or less complete, there are few victims who will dare to speak out for justice, as their very survival is at stake. The chief perpetrator of the crime, Narendra Modi, with his second victory due to polarization, is beating his chest and hiding his blood-stained hands. Will -- or can -- justice catch up? Will there be a possibility of putting in the dock the twin 'Emperors of Hindu Hearts', Thackeray and Modi, who were anointed in the aftermath of their leadership of the carnages in Mumbai and Gujarat respectively? Will they be put on trial as per the laws of the land, restoring a sense of justice in the country where communalization has eroded the values of our freedom movement, the values of pluralism, the values of syncretism, and the value of 'diversity as celebration'!

One sees a ray of hope in this move of the Supreme Court. Simultaneously one sees the NHRC and social activists staking their all to ensure that democratic norms survive in the face of the growth of the politics of hate.