Communal
violence is not new in India. This has existed all along. Despite India
adopting the word ‘Secular’ in its constitution, religious tolerance
yet remains a dream. Individuals, communal organisations, political
parties have in some form or the other played a role in perpetrating
communal violence all along. Adoption of ‘Secularism’ has not resulted
in a communal free behaviour among the Institutions. The example of
Gujarat 2002 remains a classic example where communal ideas, communal
organisations, communal propaganda came together to create a mayhem of
religious genocide. This was instigated by the State, which was to
protect the basic values of the Constitution including Secularism.
Gujarat
2002 evokes different responses. For the perpetrators of the violence,
it was a way to teach a lesson to the minorities to accept the
majoritarian goondaraj, for minorities it was an experience where
permanent wound was inflicted through violence and fear psychosis, for
the secular elements it was a complete breakdown of the functioning of
state institutions in protecting secular values and a dark phase in
Indian Democracy.
While
the damage has been done through Gujarat violence, the task however
remains that for delivering justice to victims of Gujarat violence. The
book titled ‘Foot Soldier of the Constitution – A Memoir’ by
Teesta Setalvad represents her struggle for justice for the victims of
Gujarat 2002 violence. Born in a family where subsequent generations
undertook legal practice and worked in judicial institutions and growing
up in a liberal environment, she imbibed the values as thrust upon by
the Constitution. Though she chose a different path of journalism,
technical acumen to legal aspects was natural to her.
Setalvad’s
association with reportage of communal violence began in 1984 itself
through coverage of Bhiwandi communal violence in Mumbai during 1984.
This was followed with engagement with Mumbai riots in 1993. It was
during coverage of 1984 violence, she also came in touch with Javed who
extensively covered the violence. Each of the instances revealed the
partisan behaviour of police and state agencies. In the context of
Cosmopolitan Mumbai, Shiv Sena had laid foundations for a parochial
communal rhetoric.
Communal
violence witnessed an increase in the country in the 1980s with the
rise of Hindutva politics. In Gujarat too the seeds of communal mindset
were strongly laid by RSS and VHP during the 1980s. By the 1990s there
was a strong undercurrent of anti-Muslim sentiment. 2002 was only a
result of the continual communal propaganda carried out by the Saffron
clique. Across the country too, this was seen. In Assam, one can find
the 1983 anti-Muslim Nellie massacre. While media questioned 1984
anti-sikh riots in relation to 2002 Gujarat violence, it failed to talk
of Nellie massacre which was committed by majoritarian community.
Anti-social elements in minorities were glorified to build a
stereotypical image of the minorities. This was by excluding the larger
image of the population who tended to be secular.
Teesta’s struggle against communal violence as a Journalist was spread across her stint in The Daily, later Indian Express and Business India. She later established her own Sabrang Communications and its magazine Communalism Combat which
offered deeper explanations to communal incidents in the country. It
went into the context of eruption of communal incidents and its fallout.
It also took up issues related to victims of communal incidents.
While
Dadri, Latehar or Una were later developments, the foundations of the
same were laid in Gujarat. Cow terrorism of Gau Rakshaks was prevalent
from much earlier in Gujarat. Muslim festivals such as Bakri Id were
used to mobilise Hindu sentiments against them. The perpetrators of
majoritarian communalism were made immune from punishment. A culture of
impunity was created.
Setalwad
points that Indian Constitution remains a threat for the aspirants of
Hindu Rashtra. Hence they subvert into the institutions. They segregate
cities and communities along religious lines. They felicitate the
perpetrators of violence. The discriminatory behaviour of the state also
finds its reflection in events such as offering disaster relief as was
found during Bhuj earthquake. Certain caste and religious communities
were excluded in getting relief. Social textbooks were used as a means
to teach prejudice.
Referring
to Post-Godhra violence, she points that Godhra incident was used only
as a means for communal mobilisation by the State. Towards this corpses
were paraded, mobs were instigated. Violence was encouraged. When
Gujarat violence finally broke out, calls for help was ignored. Police
remained a mute spectator similar to the one in Naroda Patiya and
Gulberg incidents. Gujarat ethnocide was only a trigger for what was
planned for long. In the violence, weapons, chemicals and cylinders were
used. Bombs, guns and weaponry were procured long back. Instances of
minority women being stripped off clothes and abused, instances of
rapes, families being massacred, babies being cut and bruised, muslim
business enterprises being targeted was part of the acts performed by
Hindutva forces. Even a Parliamentarian was killed. Dead bodies were a
reflection of the level of religious hatred and dehumanization. In the
violence, about 1, 68,000 were internally displaced, 2,000 killed, homes
of 18,000 urban and 11,000 rural families destroyed. Violence was
reported from 993 villages, and 153 of the 182 assembly constituencies.
Hate propaganda in the form of anonymous pamphlets and audio-visual
material were widely distributed preceding the genocide.
The
response of Saffron forces is to deny the happenings of Gujarat
violence on the one hand and glorify the Godhra incident. What is not
pointed out is that during the journey in Sabarmati, the RSS-VHP-Bajrang
dal was instigating the passengers with a violent communal rhetoric.
Post-Godhra, instances of Modi instructing police, senior cabinet
colleagues and administrators through statements such as a) ‘Now the
Hindus will awake’ b) ‘Hindu reaction was to be expected and this must
not be curtailed or controlled’ c) to allow ‘people to vent their
frustration and not come in the way of the Hindu backlash’ as instances
of encouraging violence is never revealed. The period also saw the clear
bias of the state against minorities. There was abdication of
responsibilities meant to protect lives. So are the instances of
Gulberg, Naroda and Sardarpura. The violence had led to shameful
destruction of the Muslim community at the physical, emotional,
economic, cultural and religious level.
The
struggle for justice for victims of Gujarat violence is being carried
out by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) over the past fifteen years.
Legal actions and litigations are being used as means to rebuild
confidence in rule of law. About sixty eight legal initiatives,
petitions and interventions have been supported. These were related to
relief camps, complaints of mass carnage, compensation claim cases, hate
speech cases, criminal conspiracy, mass murder, manslaughter and
others. Concerned citizen’s tribunal (CCT) was formed consisting of
eminent human rights activists, judges and social activists. It was to
capture testimonies of survivors, perpetrators and officials. The CCT
was able to gather rich evidence and testimonials including those
related to state role in instigating violence.
During
fight for justice, threat tactics were used against all those who stood
for justice. Vehicles used by CJP were attacked, constant surveillance
of those who testified before the Tribunal was carried out. Even the
Judges of High court who were to deliver justice were physically
attacked. Chief justice of High court had to move to Muslim majority
area as there was no faith in the law and order machinery. Instances of
state buying out people were also common. The Raghavan led Special
Investigating Team (SIT) and lawyers of post Godhra accused being paid
handsomely and provided special assignments with high fees was part of
buying out. This was including for those battling CJP on Zakia Jafri
case. On the other hand, those fighting were threatened. CJP was charged
with violating FCRA norms, accused of becoming a threat to ‘national
security’.
Despite
the 2002, ‘Normalization’ and ‘strong leadership’ was used as the basis
for the creation of a new Prime Minister nominee. In the Vibrant
Gujarat summit 2008, Business leaders threw Modi as a potential prime
ministerial candidate.
The
author expresses that Gujarat reflects a state of unchallenged state
power, which is not challenged by the political class. Political parties
have stood little with the struggle for justice. Despite the scandalous
exposures and evidence on the conspiracy behind the genocide,
institutional democracy in India has so far left Modi and his
co-conspirators relatively untouched. In the struggle for justice, while
the likes of Babu Bajrangi and accused of post godha killings roam
free, innocents accused on godhra continue to be in jails despite lack
of evidence.
What
happened in Gujarat was merely an experiment. The same is being
replicated across the country. A communal divide is being built through
‘Love Jihad’, ‘Ghar Vapsi’ and now ‘Gau Raksha’. These are being used as
terminologies to justify mass, targeted violence.
The
book by Teesta is a caution call for all those who stand for Justice
and secularism. Gujarat provides enough evidence of how the
mainstreaming of a communal ideology can play havoc with people. It
shows how a fascist ideology manipulates institutions and constitutional
principles to establish its bias and discriminatory behaviour in the
name of religion. The book is an essential reading for those to
understand the reality of Gujarat 2002.
T. Navin has done his M.Phil in Political Science from Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). He works with an NGO as a Researcher.
