No Clean Chit
By Teesta
Setalvad
There is
something distasteful about the brazenly consistent efforts made by those who
stand for powerful accused misrepresenting facts to salvage what remains of
their conscience. Nothing less than that is really expected from a party and an
ideology that thrives on bloodletting and hatred, and worse seeks to emerge
morally righteous irrespective. I shall,
this week not labour on the fact that India has had the dishonor of swearing in
a union home minister and a minister for human resources development who
actively participated in a publicly criminal act, the demolition of a religious
place of worship. The Babri Masjid, 6.12.1992 as LK Advani and Murli Manohar
Joshi cheered and watched.
Remember
also the crass victory signs that senior lawyer Ravi Shankar Prasad waved when
the Allahabad high court delivered it’s highly questionable verdict in late
September 2010? He did the same when, on 12.9.2011, when the Supreme Court
remanded the Zakia Jafri and Citizens for Justice and Peace case to be heard
before a Magistrate. Amicus Curaie Raju Ramachandran has in this case recommended
the prosecution of chief minister Modi for criminal acts.
For this
week I seek to remind readers about the concerted (if disparate) efforts to absolve
the Gujarat government of any liability, legal, criminal or moral for the mass
crimes of 1992. That the political party and ideology that has benefitted from
this self serving hypocrisy would do it is understandable, if shameful. But why
does the media, or large sections of it, electronic and print, fall in line? In
failing to deconstruct the white-wash behind the claim of the clean vhit, the
media does fair reportage and public memory a disservice.
The charade
began in December 2010 when the matter was being heard before the Supreme Court
and India’s largest English language daily ran a front page story claiming that
the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) had given the
Accused in this case—Narendra Modi and 59 others, a clean chit.
Within
months, the SIT report was out in the public domain. It exposed the front page
story to be what it was, a motivated distortion of facts. Today, in the run up
to 2014, when every efforts, illegitimate and coercive are being made to
prevent Zakia Jafri and CJP from filing an appeal against the 26th December 2013 judgement of
the Magistrate, I shall attempt to correct this motivated misrepresentation and
share the contents.
In both reports, first by the SIT, filed in May
2010 before the Supreme Court (that includes Chairman RK Raghavan's Comments
separately) and the Closure report filed before the Magistrate on 8.2.2012, the
SIT has held that while there is evidence and many of the allegations made in
the Zakia Jafri Complaint dated 8.6.2006 are true and correct, in its own assessment,
this evidence is not prosecutable. This
is not a clean chit to Modi as is being propagated. Neither does It take away
the moral responsibility for the crimes. The legal issue as I have said before,
we shall be appealing in the appropriate court.
Modi’s
Callous and Communal Mindset (chief minister and state home minister since
2002)
The SIT Report (May 2010) report
says, “In spite of the fact that ghastly
and violent attacks had taken place on Muslims at Gulberg Society and
elsewhere, the reaction of the government was not the type that would have been
expected by anyone. The chief minister had tried to water down the seriousness
of the situation at Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya and other places by saying
that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.” (Page 69 of the SIT Report to the SC, May 2010)
Modi’s Discriminatory Attitude. The 2010 SIT report to the SC says
Modi displayed a “discriminatory attitude
by not visiting the riot-affected areas in Ahmedabad where a large number of
Muslims were killed, though he went to Godhra on the same day, travelling
almost 300 km on a single day.” (Page 67) The SIT chairman also comments
that “Modi did not cite any specific
reasons why he did not visit the affected areas in Ahmedabad city as promptly
as he did in the case of the Godhra train carnage.” (Page 8 of chairman’s comments, SIT report to SC May 2010)
Sweeping and Offensive Statements by Modi. SIT Chairman RK Raghavan (May 2010
to the SC) further comments that Modi’s statement “accusing some elements in Godhra and the neighbourhood as possessing a
criminal tendency was sweeping and offensive coming as it did from a chief
minister, that too at a critical time when Hindu-Muslim tempers were running
high.” (Page 13 of SIT chairman Raghavan’s comments, SIT report to SC May 2010)
Modi Justified Killing of Innocents. The inquiry officer (AK Malhotra also notes: “His (Modi) implied justification of the
killings of innocent members of the minority community read together with an
absence of a strong condemnation of the violence that followed Godhra suggest a
partisan stance at a critical juncture when the state had been badly disturbed
by communal violence.” (Page 153 of
the SIT Report to SC, dated May 2010)
Modi’s
Election Gaurav Yatra Speech at Behacharaji, Mehsana controversial and
definitely hinted at a growing minority population. The explanation given by Shri Modi is
unconvincing and it definitely hinted at the growing minority population. (Page 160
SIT Report to SC, May 2010). These columns have excerpted the speech in
the past.
SIT Closure Report
(2012):
While the amicus finds the words spoken by the chief minister an offence, an
incitement to violence and hatred against a particular section of the Indian
people, in its closure report, the SIT finds that no criminal offence has been
committed and recommends a closure of these allegations.
Modi Government Took No Steps to Stop Illegal Bandh. According to the SIT report of 2010
to the SC, the Gujarat government did not take any steps to stop the illegal
bandh called by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on 28 February 2002. On the contrary
the BJP had supported the bandh. (Page 69, SIT Report to SC, May 2010) (It is important to remember that it was
Hindu mobs mobilised by the local VHP and BJP leaders in the name of bandhs
that had carried out the horrific massacres at Naroda and Gulberg Society on 28
February 2002 and those all over the state over the next days. March 1 was a
state wise bandh when massacres at Randhikpur-Sanjeli, Sardarpura, Sesan, Odh,
Pandharwada and Kidiad among others took place)
Modi as Home Minister did not Act to
prosecute Hate Speech. According to the SIT report of 2010 to the SC, despite
detailed reports recommending strict action submitted to Modi by field officers
of the State Intelligence Bureau, Modi as Home Minister failed to take action
against a section of the print media that was publishing communally- inciting
reports, inflaming base emotions. This had vitiated the communal situation
further. (Page 79, SIT Report to SC, May
2010)
Modi as Home Minister responsible
for Destruction of Crucial Records. The 2010 SIT report to the SC says “The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless
communication of the period pertaining to the riots.” It adds, “No records,
documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the
government during the riots had been kept.” (Page 13, SIT Report to SC, May 2010)
SIT Confirms the Serious Allegation that Godhra Dead Bodies were handed
over to Jaideep Patel of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in an illegal and
controversial move. Jaideep Patel of the VHP was also allowed to attend an
official meeting at the Collectorate, Godhra by the chief minister himself.
In the 2010 SIT Report to the SC, the
SIT says, “SIT inquiry revealed that
there was in fact a discussion at Godhra on the final disposal of bodies of
those killed in the Godhra carnage. This was during chief minister Narendra
Modi’s visit to the town on the afternoon of February 27, 2002. It was held at
the collectorate. It is not clear who all were present or consulted. Apart from
the district collector, the presence at least of Gordhan Zadaphiya (MoS, home)
and Jaideep Patel, VHP activist, has been confirmed…..”… (pgs
19-23, SIT Report to the SC, May 2010; pgs 2-3, Chairman’s Comments, SIT
report to SC May 2010). The SIT
Closure Report 8.2.2012 also admits that Jaideep Patel transported the dead
bodies to Ahmedabad.
A series of questionable and illegal
actions have been confirmed through the SIT Investigations. Until the higher
courts give their verdict on the issue, prematurely and coercively trying to
throttle legitimate appeal suggests ulterior and questionable motives.
(These columns will return to Past and Prejudice next week and deal with
other issues related to the ‘so called clean chit’ the week after.)
Ends
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.