Hoping, Without Hope

#63 by Urstruly

I beg to differ with your statement that it is becoming a hard-sell for Muslims to convince them that Al-Qaeda is a terrorist organization. Most Muslims consider Al-Qaeda and its extremist agenda as un-Islamic and terrorist. Although Al-Qaeda has many staunch supporters, they still remain a minority that is largely ignored by Muslim society. I also doubt that environmentalists, anti-globalization groups and anarchists will join hands with Al-Qaeda. These groups are opposed to pressure groups and vested interests within US and industralized nations of Europe. These groups do not believe in a clash of civilizations. On the other hand, Al-Qaeda believes vehemently in a clash of civilizations. Even their methods are different.

However, the only thing that has changed since 2001 is that the Muslim world and especially Europeans are now convinced that America is a greater threat to global security than Osama Bin Laden. Bush, Rumsfield, Cheney, Haliburton scandal, FOX News bias and Abu Ghraib scandal have basically tarnished America`s image.

In 2001, America could use the word ``terrorism`` to describe almost anything it didn`t like... and rest of the world acquiesced. In fact, India, Russia and Israel hopped onto the same bandwagon to discredit the genuine freedom movements in Palestine, Chechnya and Kashmir. However, now the situation has changed considerably... especially in Palestine and Iraq. Although Bush and Sharon are continually describing these resistance movements as terrorism, rest of the world is not buying that argument. Spain even withdrew its troops from Iraq. And Sharon is under increasing pressure to show progress on the Mideast Roadmap.

The current sectarian violence can only be attributed to the prominence given to religion in public affairs. Had Jinnah & Iqbal were contemporary politician & thinkers in Pak, the former would have been persecuted & killed for having a fancy for ham sandwiches for breakfast, & the later would have been persecuted & killed under the Blasphemy law.
Let us face the reality: Pak can either be a theocracy or a modern constitutional republic. It cannot be both at the same time.
Pak is slowly going down the road of becoming a failed state. Its salvation lies in adopting the vision put forward by Jinnah in his speech to the nation.
Why is Pakistan a Islamic Republic when all the Islamic scholars opposed the creation of Pakistan?

#62 by arjun_m

If the target of these attacks had been Musharraf... or a military compound... or US/European diplomats, then perhaps JeM could be suspected of involvement. But Shias? Shamazai? JeM`s literature and Jihad is against anti-US and anti-India, but it has never expressed any hatred toward Shias. In fact, both JeM and LeT contain many Shia muhahids.

As they say, we often define ourselves by defining whom we don`t like. Apparently the people who attacked the Shia mosque, didn`t like Shias. And there are quite a few (splintered but still alive) groups that hate Shias but have never been involved in the Kashmir jihad. This could be one of those banned groups. Other than the sectarian angle, I doubt if there is any Kashmir link here. And BTW, these Shia-Sunni gang wars started in 1986, even before Kashmir flared up.

HE:

It is a fact that HuM has had a sectarian agenda as well has been involved in Kashmir Jehad. The JeM is a relatively new organization. It was founded only Azhar was released on Dec 31, 1999. The HuM got involved in Kashmir in the mid 1990s. The Binori Madarsa was / is a supllier of jehadis to both Afghanistan and Indian Kashmir. Where exactly are you drawing a line between JeM and HuM. I agree that JeM specifically has never advocated an anti Shia agenda. Bbut you are making a mistake by looking at the groups. Follow the indviduals. The guy who tried to kill Musharaff was JeM member who had also fought in Afghanistan. You cannot really draw a line between Jehadis and SSP/ LeJ/ HuM. Within Kashmir, you can triangulate between Hizbul and others.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

HE # 66

Your second and third paragraphs contradict the first paragraph. Like I said, it is a taboo subject yet, and it will remain so for a little while longer.

Dost Mitter

I will have to agree with HP on your cut n paste from Asia Times. I think writer has committed gross mistake by naming people like Raees Amrohowi and Jon Aylia as MQM ideologues. Jon Aylia had clearly leftist leaning but in no way an ethnic ideologue. Raees, however, was a moderate middle and mostly apolitical. The only thing political about him is his daily poem that went on published in a daily for over 40 years every day. I have had an honor of meeting both gentlemen for my college magazine and another magazine that we published in Scandenevia at that time. I have no idea who the third person is. HP`s description of the genesis of MQM is quite correct. The rest of the article is quite accurate as well.

#73 by Urstruly

My second and third paragraphs only said that US and Israel will face criticism and international isolation. You are equating US/Israeli isolation with support for Al-Qaeda. This is a fallacy. European and Muslim countries will continue to prosecute the war against Al-Qaeda while simultaneously criticising US and Israel for their ham-handed actions. Al-Qaeda has made far too many enemies inside the Muslim world (attacks on Shias, Bali dance club, mosques, minorities, diplomatic enclaves, Khobar towers, etc) and inside European countries (e.g. Madrid train bombing, etc). The war on terror is henceforth going to become only a war against Al-Qaeda, and not a war against Kashmirs, Chechens, Palestinians, Basque nationalists and Iraqi dissidents.

For those who are confusing Hizbul and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the following link will make things a little clearer. There is indeed a very clear dividing line between LJ/Sipah Sihaba/Sipah Muhammad on the one hand, and Hizb/Lashkar Tayyaba/Jaish on the other. You will never find literature like this (see the following link) on a website or journal of the latter group:

Anti-Shia pamphlets distributed in Quetta before massacre

This link contains a snapshot of a leaflet condemning Shias as Kafir, published by Sipah-e-Sahaba. This leaflet was printed before the attack on a Shia mosque killed 50 worshippers in July 2003. This leaflet was discovered at Madrassah Dar ul Uloom Jamia Imdadia in Quetta. The Pakistani intelligence agencies suspected a `foreign hand` in this attack and Prime Minister Zafrullah Jamali lodged a protest with President Hamid Karzai about the anti-Pakistan activities of Indian staffers at the Kabul and Kandahar consulates.

However, the government was later embarassed when the Quetta press reported that four MMA legislators (3 senators, 1 member of National Assembly, and 1 member of Provincial Assembly) endorsed the anti-Shia content of the leaflet. The names of these legislators are:
Maulana Sami-ul-Haq, Maulana Abdul Haq, Hafiz Hussain Ahmad and Qazi Abdul Latif Kalachawi.

The leaflet essentially declared Shias as Kafir, bans intermarriages between Sunnis and Shias, declares the Shias must not be burried in Muslim graveyards and that Sunnis should not attend their funerals. The leaflet contains the testimonials of Shiekh Abdullah Abdul Aziz (Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia), Maulana Ajmal Qadri (Imam of Badshahi Mosque, Lahore), Maulana Abdus Sattar Tonsovi (President of TASP, a Sunni organization), Mufti Wali Hussain (Rector of Jamia-ul-Uloom Islamia, a madrassah in Karachi) and Maulana Malik Kandahalvi (President of Islamic Ideology Council).

For details check out Hazara.net.

Apparently, the LJ/SSP/SM are a completely different creature from LT/JeM/HuM.

#72 by arjun_m
#68 by stuka

Apparently we are reading different news websites. I have found two other authentic websites that contradict the Daily Times link posted by arjun_m (post #72). The Daily Times link mentions that Hizbul Mujahideen denied involvement in this attack whereas according to the Urdu press (Jang March 3 edition), Lashkar-e-Jhangvi called the Jang office in Karachi and Quetta to claim responsibility for the attack. The attackers recorded a video CD before carrying out the attack. Lashkar-e-Jhangvi is the only Sunni terrorist organization that produces anti-Shia Video CDs and pamphlets. While some Hizbul Mujahideen commanders may be anti-Shia, HuM`s membership is open to both Shias and Sunnis and it has never produced any hate literature against Shias. The Ashura attacks bear the signature of LJ, not Hizb.

Quetta Ashura attack bombers identified as LJ activists

QUETTA, May 17 (Online): Two suicide bombers involved in a deadly attack on a Shiite religious procession here over two months ago have been identified as members of an outlawed militant group, police said on Sunday.

Police have also arrested a constable, Ghulam Haider Lehri who allegedly aided the bombers in the March 2 attack on an Ashura procession in Quetta, provincial police chief Shoaib Suddle told reporters at a press conference here.

``Police managed to identify the two suicide attackers of Ashura procession and five other suspects,`` he said. He said the attackers belonged to the banned militant outfit, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LJ).Lehri has admitted he had been ``arranging meetings of top LJ leaders at his residence for planning such terrorist activities,`` Suddle said.

According to him, other participants of preparatory meetings for the Quetta Ashura attack were Abdul Aziz, Sher Ahmad, Muhammad Jan, Muhammad Dilshad and Commander Manzoor Ahmad.

The attack left 48 people dead including six policemen. It started when two gunmen on top of a building opened indiscriminate fire at the same time as suicide bombers walked into the crowd and blew themselves up.

Suddle identified the bombers as Abdul Nabi and Hidayatullah, who he said blew up themselves with hand grenades. He said investigators recovered a computer CD in which ``the terrorists were shown announcing their war against the Shiites``.

``After completing our mission we will meet in heaven,`` one of the attackers said on the CD. The blood samples taken from the mutilated bodies of the bombers matched the DNA tests of their close relatives who were traced by intelligence agencies on April 11, he added.

He said five other co-accused included Daud Badini and Usman Saifullah, both wanted in previous sectarian violence in Balochistan and expressed confidence they would be arrested soon. Local Shiite leader Ashraf Zaidi expressed ``satisfaction`` over the probe saying that he hoped police would be able to dismantle the ``terrorist network`` in the province.

~~~

And here is how Reuter`s AlertNet news service reported this incident:
Pakistan links March Quetta attack to banned group

QUETTA, Pakistan, May 16 (Reuters) - Pakistani police said on Sunday they had identified two Islamic militants who blew themselves up in a March attack on minority Muslim Shi`ites in the southwestern city of Quetta which killed 44 people.

The two suicide bombers belonged to Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, an outlawed Sunni group with links to al Qaeda that has carried out many sectarian attacks before.

``Both the terrorists were active members of Lashkar-e-Jhangvi,`` Shoaib Suddle, chief of police of Baluchistan province, told a news conference in the provincial capital Quetta.

He said a local policeman had also been arrested after hosting meetings during which plans for the March 7 attack were finalised.

The attack on a Shi`ite procession was the worst sectarian violence in Pakistan since a July suicide attack on a Shi`ite mosque in Quetta, which killed more than 57 people.

On March 7, the attackers used automatic weapons and threw five grenades on a crowd of thousands of Shi`ites, who make up some 15 percent of the overwhelmingly Sunni Muslim nation of 150 million people.

Later the two, identified by Suddle as Abdul Nabi (alias Sajjad) and Hidayatullah, blew themselves up.

Suddle said that in a recorded CD before the attack, the two militants declared they were at war with Shi`ites.

``After completing our mission we will meet in Jannat (heaven),`` one of the attackers said on the CD.

In the latest sectarian violence, a suicide bomber hit a crowded Shi`ite mosque in a business district of the Pakistani city of Karachi earlier this month, killing at least 15 people and wounding more than 125.

Over 125 people have died in sectarian violence in Pakistan in less than a year, most of them Shi`ites.

#73 by Urstruly on June 2, 2004 6:10pm PT

“I have no idea who the third person is”

If by the third person you meant Syed Mohd Taqi…

Syed Taqi was the older brother of Rais Amrohvi and John Ailia. Yes! all three of them were real brothers from Amroha in UP.
Syed Taqi was the Editor of Urdu Jang for a long long time. And as you mentioned Rais Amrohvi used to write a daily “Qiita” Couplet for Jang.
All of them are dead now.

Altaf Hussain used to visit Syed Taqi on his Honda 50CC and used to beg Taqi Sahib to print his press releases. Altaf certainly has come a long way!!!

The last person mentioned in that article was Shahanshah Hussain. He used to be an old time student leader along with Mairaj Mohd. Khan, Amir Haider Kazmi, and Nawaz Butt in Karachi.
Zahida Hina is John Ailia’s wife. She writes for Urdu Jang and also works for Human Rights commission in Karachi. She also chairs a committee in SAARK. She is a personal friend of I.K.Gujral, a former PM of India.

“The rest of the article is quite accurate as well.”
Did you mean NOT accurate? The whole article consists of lies and hearsay. It is not worth my time to even go into details. I wish Asia time would hire some better people than fromer Jamaat Islami student workers.

Respected Farheen Zehra

I would like to clarify your first sentence “Yesterday was a black day in the history of Karachi.” Why just Yesterday. In fact the month of May has been a blood-drenched month of the innocent for Karachi. There were many black days in the month of May. May 7th: The deadly attack on the Hyderi Mosque; 25th & 26th May: Bomb attacks at the KPT and PACC, Fatima Jinnah Road, leaving a pile of oozing carcasses. Many Shia places of worship were attacked, scores of innocent men, women & children were killed or injured. So many prominent politicians & well known figures (Hakim Said) were shot dead in Karachi. These incidents will send negative signals around the world, and alienate Pakistan from opportunity, investment and development.

Rajesh

PS: If I am wrong to what I have written, please rectify me

Old letter, but still relevant :

Seminaries and violence

Sir: The recent carnage in Quetta should remind General Musharraf of the unfulfilled promises he made about regulating religious seminaries in Pakistan. These seminaries turn out tens of thousands of students every year who are indoctrinated to adhere to extremely narrow/literal interpretations of Islam. In most cases, these religious students have very limited understanding of the world and tend to judge every issue in religious terms.

This has led to a number of conflicts because many Islamic sects differ with each other on a number of issues. The situation will only get worse as more seminaries are opened.

It is time for the government to consider implementing a ban on opening new seminaries and to close down seminaries that encourage sectarianism and extremism.

This may mean closing down a large number of seminaries, but this will have to be done if Pakistan is to become a progressive and modern state. Proper schools should replace the seminaries. Keeping in mind that many poor Pakistanis send their children to these seminaries because they cannot afford to bring them up or educate them, the government would do well to increase the education budget.

It is imperative for Pakistan’s stability that sectarianism and extremism is eliminated from society. And the first step in this direction will be to close the seminaries that propagate extremism and sectarianism. The sooner this is done, the better. Mere rhetoric is of no use. General Musharraf should know that some of us are still waiting for him to act upon the promises he made.
TAIMUR MASUD KHAN
USA

mumbaikar, this one too :) (second part of the Gujarat report)

State Government Complicity?

Failure in Godhra

The NHRC has pointed out the “serious failure of intelligence and action by the State Government [that] marked the events leading to the Godhra tragedy and the subsequent deaths and destruction that occurred.” In Section 1 above, we have seen how reports of communally motivated misbehaviour in the Sabarmati Express had been reported in the media as early as February 25th e.g. in the Jan Morcha [Faizabad]. Given Gujarat’s communal history and, in particular, the volatility of Godhra, this alone should have led the administration to take precautionary measures including the deployment of sufficient police forces on the train, and at the railway stations including Godhra. In any event, the government should have known about the returning kar sewaks from Ayodhya, since the BJP currently rules in both the Gujarat and UP governments. In view of the sensitivity of the Ayodhya issue, there should have been much more police bandobast, which if it had been in place would have ensured that the tragedy did not occur.

According to our reconstruction of events, the trouble started at the station itself where stone throwing took place. By all accounts there was a clash. This should have alerted the police forces including the GRF, who knowing the character of Godhra and the volatility of Signal Faliya, should have taken preventive action immediately. Further, Cabin A where the train stopped for the second and final time, is less than a kilometre away and the whole area is clearly visible. A crowd gathering there could easily be observed and could only have meant trouble. The police could, and should, have been there in a matter of minutes.

In case the official version, that the tragedy was premeditated and ISI-inspired is given credence, then the intelligence lapse is much more serious. How could such a premeditated plot have escaped the notice of the intelligence agencies? If the fire bombs, petrol and weapons were collected and stored over time and other preparations made over a period, why was this not detected, particularly when tensions were known to be high over the VHP programme in Ayodhya?

Under any construction of the events, there have been very serious lapses by the administration and police. There is one aspect of the formal procedures of intelligence gathering that goes some way to explain the intelligence lapses. Both State and Central intelligence agencies have as a matter of routine maintained regular surveillance of certain organizations deemed to require such watching in the name of internal security. These have included certain fundamentalist religious organizations. On the watch-list are also certain extremist cults or political groupings deemed to belong to the far right (e.g. Anand Margis) or far left (e.g. certain Naxalite groups). However, the rise to power of the Sangh (through the BJP) at the Centre and in Gujarat has meant that as far as central intelligence agencies and those of Gujarat state are concerned, regular surveillance of the activities of the RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal though prevalent in the past would now appear to have been dropped. This could be one major reason why no tabs were kept, as they should have been, on the activities of the kar sevaks on the Sabarmati Express.

The Post-Godhra events & the February 28th VHP Bandh

The government’s decision to swiftly transfer the bodies of the Godhra victims to Ahmedabad and elsewhere and to allow public funerals was incendiary. The ghastly condition of the charred bodies and remains was bound to cause public grief, revulsion and anger. In a communally polarised State like Gujarat, the outbreak of communal mobilisation and violence as a result of this should have been easily anticipated. Large crowds were allowed to collect to receive the bodies at Ahmedabad railway station and then to take them in a public procession. Even on the journey from Godhra to Ahmedabad which passed through Vadodara, there were press reports of at least two stabbings at the Vadodara railway station itself.

This act was compounded by the government’s decision to allow the February 28th Bandh. At a time when communal passions were aroused by the Godhra incidents and the funerals of the victims, a bandh was certainly going to provoke violence. Not only did the government not dissuade the VHP from calling the bandh, it instead went ahead and joined it. The political leadership’s advice to the officers not to do anything during the bandh that would hurt “Hindu sentiments” was a transparent attempt to ensure that the bandh supporters were subjected to minimum administrative and police restraint.

Since it was clear that an immediate post-Godhra bandh could only lead to communal violence, the Chief Minister should have forced the VHP to withdraw the bandh, failing which he should have suppressed it by deploying the entire might of the State and requisitioning extra forces from outside. He clearly failed to do so, and instead did the very opposite. By doing this the VHP and Gujarat government, in effect, prepared the grounds for the riots.

Police Partisanship

The NHRC notes that the communal marauders were widely reported to have been “singling out certain homes and properties for death and destruction in certain districts-sometimes within view of police stations and personnel…” Reportedly in many cases, including the massacres in Gulbarg society in which former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri was brutally slain, and in Naroda-Patia where more than 80 people died [unofficial figures are much higher], the police have been accused of having been partisan and anti-Muslim. No satisfactory explanation has been given for the inordinate police delay in intervening in Gulbarg society, despite Jafri’s incessant requests for help. Some observers say that Jafri’s spirited criticism of Chief Minister Modi during the latter’s campaign in the Rajkot Assembly by-election, was a factor in the police’s persistent lack of response. [See Box 2]. In Naroda-Patia, according to survivors, the State Reserve Police [SRP] not only refused the fleeing Muslims shelter, but tear-gassed them, forcing them towards the waiting mobs. In case after case, Muslim victims claimed the police used force against them, including firing, thereby providing cover and support to the rampaging mobs. A number of victims told us that but for the police partisanship, the toll in the Gujarat carnage would have been much lower.

This partisanship was much greater at the lower levels, where there appears to have been substantial communalization of the police force. There are widespread reports of the lower echelons of the police being especially partisan and hostile. But efforts to get the senior officials to remedy this parlous state of affairs seem to have failed. This situation continues to this day. On April 3rd, The Asian Age crime reporter in Ahmedabad Ms. Sonal Kellogg, along with the reporter of a Surat-based daily, was beaten up by the police in the Mariam Bibi Ni Chawli area in Gomtipur. When she complained to the Deputy Commissioner of Police [Zone V] R.J. Savani, whom she knew quite well, all he said was that “it might have been a mistake.” When she protested to the Police Commissioner P.C. Pande at his office, he was dismissive; “Don’t bother me…I don’t have time…file a complaint if you want.” As the journalist sums up, “If policemen can be so brutal towards journalists on duty, their behaviour with ordinary citizens could be so much more atrocious. It is a pity that the police in Gujarat is either a mute spectator or it harasses and tortures innocent people.”

Senior police officials have indicated that their hands were tied, implying that this was done by top politicians. But this does not absolve the top police brass in Gujarat for failing to do their duties. The maintenance of law and order is the direct responsibility of the police force. Regardless of what political pressures may or may not be put upon them, there exists a structure of rules and powers that empowers the police to ignore such political pressures, and to ensure that law and order is maintained. This can be done through a variety of measures including identification of likely communal hotspots, preventive arrests and detentions on a mass scale in curfew and other areas, back-up preparations, etc. What is more, despite a degree of communalization of the police at lower levels, as long as the top hierarchy of the police make it clear that the police must and will do its duty of ensuring peace, such communal prejudices are invariably kept firmly in check and easily subordinated to the acceptance of the existing chain of command and operation. It is when the top officials do not assert themselves that wrong signals go down the line. In the case of Ahmedabad on Feb.27th there were virtually no preventive arrests by police stations in communally sensitive areas. [See Box 11].

That is why instances of police partisanship and ineptitude were not all pervasive and there are many creditable examples of IAS and IPS officers fulfilling their responsibilities courageously and effectively in Gujarat during this period. The NHRC cites the Gujarat government’s Report to it noting “that many instances were recorded in the Report of prompt and courageous action by District Collectors, Commissioners and Superintendents of Police and other officers to control the violence…” But the NHRC also points out that “the Report itself reveals that while some communally-prone districts succeeded in controlling the violence, other districts-sometimes less prone to such violence succumbed to it.” Thus where decisive and capable officers intervened, the communal holocaust could be averted. The fact it was not in the capital Ahmedabad, was not due to lack of force but politically-motivated ineptitude. It should be noted that the Police Commissioner in Ahmedabad commanded a total of 10,000 men including 3,000 armed men, along with 16 companies of SRP. Yet mobs of up to 5,000 and more men were allowed to run amuck, loot, rape, beat, murder while the police stood by, when it did not actually abet the mobs. As one senior police officer told us, the problem was ``not lack of force, but lack of will.”

This lack of political will has also affected investigation. Victims claim that for the most part, the police are not registering FIRs. When they do they avoid writing specific names of alleged wrong doers thereby defeating the purpose at the very outset. Further, they cite lesser offenses, for example, writing the charge of rioting instead of murder. As the instance of ACP Barot cited above shows, the investigating officers are often biased to begin with. The NHRC has clearly noted this and related factors: “numerous allegations have been made both in the media and to the team of the Commission…that FIRs…were being distorted or poorly recorded, and that senior political personalities were seeking to ‘influence’ the working of police stations by their presence within them, the Commission is constrained to observe that there is a widespread lack of faith in the integrity of the investigating process and the ability of those conducting investigations.”

Role of the Sangh Parivar

The primary responsibility for the communal conflagration rests with the Sangh Parivar. It provided the ideological, political and administrative leadership and backbone for the tragic events in Gujarat. In Godhra, but for the provocation by the VHP kar sewaks, the tragic events that triggered off the State-wide holocaust would not have occurred, though that does not justify the mob’s murderous response. The Sangh Parivar sought to capitalise publicly in regard to the funerals of the Godhra dead in ways that further inflamed communal passions. The VHP and other Hindutva groups circulated inflammatory pamphlets thereby helping to create the communal polarisation necessary for the ensuing mobilisation and mayhem. [See Box 5 and Appendix 2]. These pamphlets and other propaganda methods were unlawful and actionable. But to date, since cadres and leaders of the VHP and Bajrang Dal are also BJP leaders and legislators, no action has been taken despite extensive media coverage and criticism. No other organisation indulging in such disruptive and illegal ideological propaganda would have been given such latitude, much less support.

Sangh Parivar leaders were repeatedly identified by victims and other informants as instigating and leading the marauding mobs. This is why in the few instances where individual names have been recorded in the FIRs, these include Sangh Parivar activists. The media has reported that for crucial hours on February 28th from around Noon to 4.30 PM, two Ministers, Health Minister Ashok Bhatt and Urban Development Minister I.K. Jadeja were present in the Ahmedabad City and Gandhinagar State Police Control Rooms, respectively. Minister Bhatt was reportedly present when former MP Jafri called for help. Most importantly, though the situation was clearly out of control, the State government delayed in calling in the Army. Even after the Army was called in on February 28th night, its deployment was delayed till the next afternoon. Even then, it is reported, it received insufficient police support and intelligence. The fact that a sympathetic Central government deemed it fit to send Defence Minister George Fernandes to oversee the army deployment, is a measure of their lack of faith in the State’s leadership to adequately utilise the Army.

The bias of the Sangh Parivar is highlighted by the fact that it wanted to compensate the victims of the Godhra violence with Rs. 2 lakhs, in contrast to the Rs. 1 lakh offered to victims in the post-Godhra violence. This was reversed only after representatives of the families bereaved by the violence in Godhra agreed to equality of compensation at Rs. 1 lakh. This, it has been reported, was made possible because of private assurances of separate financial help by the VHP to the said families. The NHRC commenting on the initially proposed discriminatory compensation, strongly noted that “the issue raised impinged seriously on the provisions of the Constitution contained in Articles 14 and 15, dealing respectively with equality before the law and equal protection of the laws within the territory of India, and the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.” The imposition of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance [POTO] only against the accused in the Godhra incident also smacked of bias. Both decisions were only reversed after considerable public outcry, and Central Government intervention.

Biases are also indicated by the fact, which the NHRC has noted, that prior to its visit no senior political leaders nor high level officers had visited many Muslim refugee camps. Work has started in some camps like Shah-e-Alam only when it became known that the Prime Minister would be visiting it. The procedure for estimating and providing compensation also started around that time. When it became known that the Prime Minister would not be visiting some camps, work there, according to media reports, was quickly abandoned. Notwithstanding the Prime Minister’s instructions and sustained Opposition demands, no rehabilitation work has started though more than a month has lapsed since tens of thousands of Muslims entered dozens of refugee camps. Given the scale of the devastation and the large numbers of people involved, rehabilitation work, to be effective, should have commenced much earlier.

The most important role of the Sangh Parivar has been in suborning the administration to carry out its ideological and political agenda. The control of the Gujarat government was crucial for the Hindutva forces. Without it they could not have planned, instigated, mobilised, and implemented the communal pogrom, and then protected its activists who participated in these activities from legal and societal retribution. It is noteworthy that at no stage of the early communal violence did Chief Minister Modi make sustained public appeals to Hindu groups to eschew violence and live in amity with their Muslim neighbours.

The role of the BJP leadership in the ruling NDA coalition in the Union government has been crucial. Despite unprecedented violence, loss of life and property and colossal damage to the State’s economy, the BJP central leadership has gone out of its way to defend the Modi government. Though Home Minister Advani’s Gandhinagar constituency includes some of the worst affected areas, he paid a brief visit some days after the violence erupted. The Prime Minister’s own visit was more than a month after the violence started, and that to just for a day. In a tragedy of such dimensions more visible concern is normally displayed and expected. It is noteworthy, that in States marked by much less violence and disturbance, like in Manipur last year after the extension of the Naga cease-fire to the Manipur hill districts, the Centre imposed President’s Rule under Article 356. This sustained and unrelenting support has encouraged and enabled the Modi government to persist with its communal and partisan policies. Additionally, both these governments have failed to fulfill Constitutional requirements.

Two Gujarat High Court judges, one a serving judge Justice M. H. Kadri and another a retired judge and former Chairman, MRTP Commission, Justice A.N. Divecha, had to leave their own homes on 28th February, on the advice of the Chief Justice of the High Court, because adequate police protection was not available. Justice A.P. Ravani, former Chief Justice, Rajasthan High Court, in his deposition to the NHRC of 21st March 2002, has stated that he advised Justice Kadri that for him “to shift from his official residence for the reason that he is not given full protection would amount to [an] insult to the independence of the judiciary and also an insult to the secular philosophy of the Constitution.” [See Box 7, and Appendix 3]. The NHRC in its comment on this event noted that the “pervasive sense of insecurity prevailing in the State…extended to all segments of society, including to two Judges of the High Court of Gujarat, one sitting and the other retired who were compelled to leave their homes because of the vitiated atmosphere. There could be no clearer evidence of the failure to control the situation.”

From all these instances it would appear that there has been a Constitutional breakdown of law and order in Gujarat attracting Article 355, and obligating the use of Article 356. This is indicated by the NHRC when it declared that the State’s responsibility should be gauged by “the failure to protect the life, liberty, equality and dignity of the people of Gujarat.”

Conclusions

1] The events in Gujarat do not constitute a communal riot. Barring the tragic attack at Godhra on February 27th which was a communal riot, the bulk of the violence that followed was state-backed and one-sided violence against Muslims tantamount to a deliberate pogrom.

2] For the first time since 1969, the communal violence in Gujarat has assumed a comprehensive State-wide dimension. But unlike 1969, several new areas hitherto unaffected by communal tension (both in cities and in the state as a whole), including large swathes of the rural areas, have been affected by communal tension marked by attacks by the largely tribal people, often from neighbouring villages, on the Muslim minority.

3] The casualties have been very high. While the official estimate of deaths is below 800, unofficial estimates start at 2,000 and go even higher. A major reason for this underestimation is that the deaths in rural areas have not all been reported as entire settlements have been wiped out, with no one left to report the losses to the police, which, as shown above, has generally been reluctant to file FIRs even in the urban and semi-urban areas. In view of the Administration’s attempt to minimize the violence claiming that it was under control within 72 hours, it would be interested in understating the actual extent of casualties.

4] Certain crucial aspects of the carrying out of the pogrom required systematic planning well in advance of the Godhra incident. The lists the rioters possessed and used must have been compiled over time. The targeting of Muslim homes, institutions, establishments and shrines was very precise and accurate. Even when there was only one Muslim shop or home in a congested Hindu-dominated area, it was attacked, ransacked and burnt. Businesses that had Hindu or non-Muslim names, were identified and targeted along with others in which Muslims were minority or sleeping partners. The mobs were huge, at times several thousand strong. They were brought in buses and trucks. Vehicles were also used to ferry thousands of LPG gas cylinders, which in turn were widely used as explosives to destroy property. There must have been official connivance to release such large quantities of LPG gas cylinders. In the weeks before the outbreak Ahmedabad was experiencing a widely reported shortage of such cylinders. Vehicles were also used to transport looted goods. The leaders of the mobs allegedly had mobile phones as well as water bottles, and regularly communicated with others, presumably including their political bosses.

5] It is a measure of the virtual breakdown of large areas of police functioning that intelligence reports of this Hindutva planning were either not compiled or ignored by higher ups. These types of preparations should not have gone unnoticed since, at the very least, hundreds must have been involved. Further, this mass movement of men, materials and vehicles could easily have been curbed by decisive police action, which would have led to a dramatic fall in casualties, rape and destruction of property. Virtually no preventive arrests were made further emboldening the mobs. Later arrests reportedly had a disproportionate number of Muslims. In sharp contrast, in places like Kacchch, Surat, Amreli, etc., where tough, decisive and extensive action was taken by the administration and police, the situation was kept under control. This would indicate that the breakdown of law and order in Ahmedabad, Vadodara, and elsewhere was a consequence of the politicisation of the administration and police.

6] The suborning of large sections of the administration and police to permit, and in numerous cases to facilitate, the Hindutva agenda, was critical for the spread, intensity and persistence of the communal violence. As was the blind eye turned to the provocative propaganda by sections of the Gujarati media, Sangh Parivar affiliates notably the VHP, and at times by State functionaries themselves. The government statements immediately after Godhra virtually accusing the Ghanchis of Singal Faliya of acting as Pakistani ISI agents, and their decision to publicise the transporting of the charred bodies to Ahmedabad for public funeral, can only be seen as a cynical attempt to foment communal tension and hysteria essential for the attacks that inevitably followed. This was compounded by the State government’s sanction and support for the VHP bandh and their signal to the bureaucracy and police to minimise their intervention. Since then the government has systematically tried to cover up, minimise, and even justify, the extent of violence, while protecting the guilty and those guilty of dereliction of duty. This is why the events of February-March 2002 can only be called a state-sponsored pogrom.

7] Instead of intervening and taking decisive action against the State government, the Central government has chosen to minimize the seriousness of what has happened, with senior Central government leaders early on alleging without proof, ISI involvement in Godhra. Without this sustained and consistent support, the Modi government could not have continued in power or have been emboldened to continue with its bloody, anti-Constitutional and anti-national activities. Since the defence of the Constitutional order is its primary duty, the Union government itself has failed to fulfill its primary duties, and uphold its oath of office.

8] What has happened in Gujarat is not only a gruesome tragedy for that State, or a national tragedy as the Prime Minister keeps saying. It is much more than that. If those guilty, whether for the Godhra killings or for the carrying out and covering up of the state-sponsored pogrom are allowed to go unpunished, it will have severe consequences for the continuation of India as a secular, multi-cultural democracy. If minorities along with all those who disagree with Hindutva fanatics, (together the large majority of the people of India), can be attacked in this manner then a secular India cannot survive.

Recommendations

1] In view of the Constitutional breakdown in Gujarat, [patent in the concerted and systematic challenge mounted to the secular foundation of the polity; in the failure to protect the life liberty and safety of a sitting High Court judge belonging to the minority community; in the monumental breakdown of law and order, in the very heart of the state capital and elsewhere; and in the large scale looting, arson and killing to which the minority community was allowed to be subjugated systematically], under the obligations enjoined on it under Article 355, the Union government should impose President’s Rule under Article 356.

2] During President’s Rule, stringent and extensive measures must be undertaken to depoliticise and decommunalise the bureaucracy and police at all levels. The impartial and efficient functioning of the Gujarat administration and police must be restored in accordance with the provisions and injunctions of the Constitution.

3] The K.G. Shah Commission of Inquiry should be replaced by a Commission of Inquiry headed by a sitting Supreme Court judge and including one or more sitting High Court judges, with more extensive terms of reference similar to that of the earlier Justice Jagmohan Reddy Inquiry Commission.

4] Special courts should be set up to try the guilty, including leading politicians. CBI inquiries be instituted against senior police officers and bureaucrats suspected of dereliction of duty.

5] Recommendations of the National Police Commission [1979-81] to establish the autonomy of the police and free it from undue political control should be accepted and implemented immediately.

6] Immediate measures for relief and rehabilitation. Peace committees must be set up in all localities, including unaffected ones. These committees should be involved in creating a conducive atmosphere for the victims to return home, once their residences are reconstructed. Adequate compensation should be given for the reconstruction of commercial and industrial establishments. The necessary rules may be revised, and the Centre can give the necessary financial support. When this is not possible, peace committees in the area of relocation should be involved. All efforts must be made to prevent further ghettoisation of the Muslim community.

7] In view of the trauma, victims especially women and children have suffered, free medical, including psychiatric, care should be provided. As there has apparently been widespread rape, including of girl children, special counselling by medical personnel as well as by social workers should be organised.

8] The role of sections of the media, particularly the Gujarati language press, should be investigated by the Press Council, and deterrent and remedial action be taken.

---

Section 1

Box 1: A History of Communal Riots in Gujarat

After independence, Gujarat witnessed its first major communal riot involving large-scale massacres, arson and looting in 1969. The riots took a toll of over 1,000 lives and property worth crores of Rupees was destroyed. During the years 1974 to 1980, other issues preoccupied Gujarati society. The 1984 anti-reservation agitation also took something of a communal turn as this was one way of reducing the polarisation that was otherwise taking place between upper caste and lower caste Hindus. During the nineties, the Ram Janmabhoomi issue began to occupy the centre of the stage. L. K. Advani’s Rath Yatra in 1990 led to the highest number of communal riots in the state. Communal passions were raised particularly in those areas where Hindu-Muslim amity had prevailed in the past. Violence also spread to rural areas.

Organised efforts were made in civil society through informal channels, the print and visual media, public lectures to provide new and more militant interpretations of Hinduism and to promote a feeling among Hindus that as a majority community they were being treated unjustly through ‘appeasement’ of Muslims by various ‘vested interests’. The view that Muslims were conservative, anti-national, fundamentalist and pro-Pakistan was systematically promoted. In some cases Hindus were even exhorted to take up arms to defend their interests.

The BJP came to power in Gujarat in the mid-nineties. Steady state support was extended to the activities of organisations such as the RSS, VHP, Shiv Sena, Bajrang Dal and so on. School curricula were modified to be in tune with the Hindutva ideology. Anti-Christian propaganda and violence were initiated. Efforts were made to penetrate the tribal belt where the influence of the BJP was limited. Trishuls, swords and other weapons were distributed at ceremonial religious functions. Training campaigns were carried out to spread ideological messages.

Between 1987 and 1991, an estimated 106 major riots took place in Gujarat. Political rivalry and conflicts during elections were responsible for triggering around 40 percent of these riots. Tensions related to ‘religious processions’ triggered another approximately 22 percent of all riots. Other triggers were personal ill-feelings, cricket matches, sudden quarrels, love affairs between Hindu girls and Muslim boys and vice versa, and so on. Persistent communal tensions have contributed to the perpetuation of violence as a way of life and the emergence of authoritarian elements in society, which seek to destroy civic order. The mixing of politics with religion has played havoc in Gujarat. Communal riots have often been engineered to overthrow inconvenient state governments. Political confrontation and violence as a way of asserting one’s presence have become established practices in the state’s democratic polity. The sheer numerical strength and violence of organised mobs is sometimes used to supplant normal legal processes. Political violence in combination with emotionally charged religious fanaticism has sought to destroy the social fabric and to divide the people.

Since 1969, police posts have become almost a permanent feature of the city landscape in Ahmedabad. Many politicians move about with armed guards and vehicles to safeguard their security from perceived enemies. Politico-administrative institutions have been unable to contain violence firmly, fairly and in accordance with the law. The Justice Jaganmohan Commission Report of 1970 and the Justice Dave Commission Report in 1990, have clearly stated that the country belongs to no single community immutably different and separate from other sections of society. A disturbing assessment of the current situation in Gujarat, which was widely expressed to the members of this fact-finding mission, was that a large section of Hindus in Gujarat have come to perceive some sort of a ‘social sanction’ behind the infliction of wanton violence against the minority Muslim community in the state.

---

Section 2

B ox 2 : Murder Most Foul: The Death of Iqbal Ehsan Jafri and Family Members

Among those killed and injured by marauding mobs in Ahmedabad from February 28th onwards were prominent Muslims as well as poor Muslim families. Some were fortunate enough to be able to flee. This was the case with retired Justice Akbar N. Divecha whose house was burnt down. The Special IG of Police, A. I. Saiyed had to run for his life. The former Congress MP, Iqbal Ehsan Jafri was burnt alive along with his family members (barring his brave wife who managed to escape the wrath of the marauders). He was living in the Gulbarg Society colony of Chamanpura area in the city of Ahmedabad. Several other Muslim families in Gulbarg Society were similarly burnt alive. By all accounts several thousands had gathered in a mob on February 28th to carry out looting, arson, rape and killings.

Police officials, speaking anonymously, confirmed that Jafri had made frantic telephone calls to the Director General of police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional chief Secretary (Home) and others. Three mobile vans of the city police were on hand around Jafri’s house but did not intervene. Our police sources further confirmed that the MP resorted to firing in self-defence when he totally failed in his attempts to get police assistance. At that point, the maurauders broke into his house, and among other inhuman deeds, stripped and raped his daughters and then burnt them alive along with their father. It was only the Rapid Action Force (RAF) of the central government that belatedly intervened when they arrived on the scene.

---

Box 3: Electoral Political Calculations by the BJP?

The BJP last formed the state government through its victory in assembly elections in 1998. It came to power on the campaigning slogan of promising freedom from “Bhook, Bhey Aur Brashtachar”, or freedom from hunger, fear and corruption. Between 1998 and the February 27, 2002, however, the BJP has suffered badly in elections at all levels.

In the December 2000 elections to 6 municipal corporations, to 25 district panchayats and to the far more numerous Taluka elections held simultaneously, the BJP lost heavily. It lost control in almost all the district panchayat elections. It retained four of the six municipalities but its two losses were in the most prestigious municipalities of Ahmedabad, the capital and Rajkot where the RSS and the Sangh has had its strongest foothold. The BJP had held Ahmedabad corporation for the last 15 years and Rajkot for the last 25 years. The Congress party was the biggest beneficiary of the BJP’s electoral reversals.

In September 2001 under the previous BJP regime in the state headed by Keshubhai Patel, it lost to the Congress in the two assembly elections held then. Narendra Modi was brought in as chief minister of Gujarat to replace Patel shortly after that debacle, partly to bring about a change in the BJP’s sinking electoral fortunes. However, in the February 24, 2002 bye-elections held in three assembly seats (all held previously by the BJP) the party lost two of them by heavy margins to the Congress, and Modi himself was elected from the third Rajkot constituency by a much reduced margin as compared to the previous poll. It was widely believed, rightly or wrongly, that he could even have lost if the Congress had fielded a stronger candidate.

The question naturally arises as to whether there are any electoral-political considerations behind what subsequently happened from February 28 onwards? This can only be speculated upon. However, what is a fact is that the Gujarat state government and party headed by Modi has, after the outbreak of prolonged communal violence in Gujarat, wanted to hold assembly elections before the scheduled time of February-March 2003. This is confirmed by all the major dailies of New Delhi and elsewhere on March 28, 2002, which reported on Modi’s visit to Delhi to meet the Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee. The PM is reported to have told Modi to forget about seeking to reschedule (bring forward) the assembly polls at this juncture and to concentrate on restoring normalcy in the state first.

Although it is, of course, the Election Commission that has final say on the precise timing of the next assembly polls, the fact that Modi has sought to bring forward the dates of the assembly elections in Gujarat clearly indicates that it is the belief of himself and his party in the state that the BJP will benefit from the political fall-out of the carnage that has taken place.

---

Box 4 : Translation of an Article in Sandesh

[March 1, 2002, Page 16]

FROM AMONG THOSE ABDUCTED FROM SABARMATI EXPRESS TWO DEAD BODIES OF HINDU GIRLS FOUND NEAR KALOL IN MUTILATED STATE

Vadodara, Thursday: The details of the information about the dead bodies of two girls abducted from the bogies, during the attack on the Sabarmati express, yesterday, found in a mutilated and terribly disfigured form, near a pond in Kalol, has added fuel to the already volatile situation of tension, not only in Panchmahal, but in the whole State.

As part of a cruel inhuman act that would make even a devil weep, the breasts of both the dead bodies had been cut. Seeing the dead bodies one knows that the girls had been raped again and again, perhaps many times. There is a speculation that during this act itself the girls might have died.

The police, however, have kept quiet and have not spoken about this sensitive event. On account of that, various speculations during an already tense situation are like adding ghee to the fire.

According to the talk heard during the night one more dead body of a girl, also in a terribly mutilated form, had been found. After having raped and mutilated, the body of the woman was set on fire with petrol. Is there no limit to the lust?

---

Box 5: Translation of a VHP Leaflet

[VHP leaflet, Jai Shri Ram]

Wake up! Arise! Think! Enforce!

Save the country! Save the religion!

Economic boycott is the only solution! The anti-national elements use the money earned from the Hindus to destroy us!

They buy arms! They molest our sisters and daughters! The way to break the backbone of these elements is: An economic non-cooperation movement.

Let us resolve:

1. From now on I will not buy anything from a Muslim shopkeeper!

2. I will not sell anything from my shop to such elements!

3. Neither shall I use the hotels of these anti-nationals, nor their garages!

4. I shall give my vehicles only to Hindu garages! From a needle to gold, I shall not buy anything made by Muslims, neither shall we sell them things made by us!

5. Boycott whole-heartedly films in which Muslim hero-heroines act! Throw out films produced by these anti-nationals!

6. Never work in offices of Muslims! Do not hire them!

7. Do not let them buy offices in our business premises, nor sell or rent out houses to them in our housing societies, colonies or communities.

8. I shall certainly vote, but only for him who will protect the Hindu nation.

9. I shall be alert to ensure that our sisters-daughters do not fall into the ‘love-trap’ of Muslim boys at school-college-workplace.

10. I shall not receive any education or training from a Muslim teacher.

Such strict economic boycott will throttle these elements! It will break their backbone! Then it will be difficult for them to live in any corner of this country. Friends, begin this economic boycott from today! Then no Muslim will raise his head before us! Did you read this leaflet? Then make ten photocopies of it, and distribute it to our brothers. The curse of Hanumanji [be] on him who does not implement this, and distribute it to others! The curse of Ramchandraji also be on him! Jai Shriram!

A true Hindu patriot!

---

Section 3

Box 6: Selected Quotes From the Press

1. March 1, 2002 (Times of India, Delhi Edition )

Chief Minister Narendra Modi stated: “I’m absolutely satisfied with how the police and the government has handled the backlash. I’m happy the violence has been largely contained.”

Narendra Modi said that: “The five crore people of Gujarat have shown remarkable restraint under grave provocation.”

On Ehsan Jafri’s murder, Narinder Modi said: “Before Congress leader Jafri’s House was set ablaze, reports claim that there was firing on the mob from inside his residence. (It is) preplanned and the incident seems to be a terrorist activity.”

2. March 2, 2002 (Times of India, Delhi Edition)

On the violence after Godhra, Modi stated: “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.”

3. March 4, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

The Union Home Minister, Mr. L.K. Advani when asked whether he favoured an inquiry into what happened after Godhra said: “It’s up to the State Government to decide. But the inquiry in Godhra cannot be related with any inquiry into the incidents later.”

(Times of India, Delhi Edition)

Chief Minister Modi stated: “The Government has decided that families of those killed in the Godhra attack will be paid Rs.2 Lakh while relatives of those killed in the violence following Godhra will get Rs. One Lakh per victim.”

4. March 5, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

The BJP National President, Mr. Jana Krishnamurthy said: “The post-Godhra violence, though strongly condemnable is a result of revulsions after Godhra. You can’t count out human feelings.”

5. March 6, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujarat said: “I have brought peace to the state in 72 hours.” The violence has continued for over a month.

(Times of India, Delhi Edition)

On being asked about his discriminatory treatment between the communities, Modi replied: “What discrimination? You (media) are all out to pull my government down.”

6. March 6, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

Modi referring to the post-Godhra violence said: “What happened is secular violence which happens during communal violence.”

He further went on to call the February 28 bandh of the VHP a “natural bandh”, whatever that means.

7. March 14, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

Regarding the continuing violence reported by the press, Modi declares: “There is a conspiracy going on to bring disrepute to the good name of Gujarat.”

8. March 15, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

Talking about the future electoral impact of the communal carnage, an unnamed BJP hardliner reported to be close to the Chief Minister said: “The party leadership can certainly translate this Hindu backlash into votes, in case it decided to go for fresh Assembly elections in May or June.” [Reported in the Indian Express, Ahmedabad edition, page 5.]

9. March 18, 2002 (Hindustan Times, Delhi Edition)

The RSS Resolution passed in their all-India General Council meeting held in Bangalore declares the post-Godhra violence to be “natural and spontaneous”. The Resolution also says: “Let the Muslims understand their real safety lies in the goodwill of the majority.”

10. March 20, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

Justifying the use of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) to arrest people after the Godhra incident, although POTO was not used thereafter to arrest anyone suspected of involvement in the post-Godhra killings and property destruction, the Gujarat Minister of State for Home, Gordhan Zadaphia said: “In Godhra an outside agency like the ISI was involved and it was a pure terrorist act. But what took place in the State later was mob fury.”

11. March 22, 2002 (Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition)

The Gujarat State Minister for Civil Supplies, Bharat Barot calls for the dismantling of relief camps filled with Muslim victims of the terrible carnage, so as dispel what he claims are Hindu fears about their presence. Or as he puts it, “so that there is no further communal disturbance”. In short, the victims are themselves being blamed for representing a communal danger.

12. March 25, 2002 (Times of India, Delhi Edition)

In Rajkot when opening a party office, Modi said: “the irresponsible statements being made by the Opposition in the Lok Sabha are one of the reasons why the Gujarat violence is not abating.” He further said: “The Opposition is keen on keeping the fire burning in Gujarat.” Modi caused an uproar in Parliament when he stated that the riots in the state would end when the Parliament session itself ended.

13. March 27, 2002 (Times of India, Delhi Edition)

Modi when asked about the transfer of senior police officers stated: “Senior police officers haven’t been victimized by transfers. They have just been promoted.” After meeting the Prime minister he said: “There is no talk of change of leadership. Everyone is satisfied.”

14. April 2, 2002 (Asian Age, Delhi Edition)

The VHP International General Secretary, Praveen Togadia said: “What is happening in Gujarat is not communal riots but people’s answer to Islamic Jihad.”

15. April 5, 2002 (Economic Times, Delhi Edition)

The Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee said: “I have full faith in Modi that he would follow the ideals of Rajdharma.” [Rajdharma means ‘ethics of rule’].

---

Box 7: A Revealing Indictment

Ahmedabad is the capital of the State of Gujarat. A democratically elected government is in place there. It is headed by someone who was administered the oath of allegiance to the Constitution of India and is sworn to uphold the rule of law without fear or favour, and to protect the life and liberty of all citizens irrespective of their religious affiliation. Under our Constitution, the Judiciary has a crucial role to perform not only as dispenser of justice but also as guarantor of the right to life and liberty. It follows that a special responsibility devolves on the Executive at both the Centre and in the States to protect the life, liberty and safety of the members of the Judiciary and to ensure the necessary working conditions wherein they can discharge their Constitutional functions.

And yet, in Ahmedabad, on February 28/March 1, 2002, there was a complete abnegation of this responsibility by the State government with regard to Justice Kadri (and his family), a Muslim sitting judge of the Gujarat High Court. The written submission to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) by the retired Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court Judge, resident in Ahmedabad, Justice A. P. Ravani, when carefully read for its revelations and inferences, constitutes a searing indictment of the State government and Police for their unacceptable and ‘inexplicable’ failure to fulfill their Constitutional responsibilities to protect the Judiciary. [See Appendix 3]

On 28th February, arson was taking place in front of the High Court building despite the presence of a police company, which is always deployed in the High Court premises, and with the Sola Police Station only half a kilometre away. The law and order situation had deteriorated to such an extent that the Judges had to take the unprecedented step of leaving the Court abruptly, although in the past the Courts have continued to function on working days even in riot conditions elsewhere. While the police could and did escort the Judges out of the Court, they did not protect the Court and its continued functioning! [Though the provision of a police escort is not specifically mentioned in the deposition, this was confirmed in a personal communication with Justice Ravani.]

The situation was very tense near Justice Kadri’s bungalow (his official residence), where incidents of looting and arson were taking place. Despite all efforts by the Chief Justice Dharmadhikari (who in official protocol ranks second only to the Chief Minister) to ensure police protection for Justice Kadri, he and other judges of the High Court, given the failure of such efforts, urged Judge Kadri to move himself and his family to Justice Vaghela’s residence for the night. The ordeal did not end there. The Vastrapur area (where the Chief Justice’s residence is located, as well as the bungalows of other judges, and where a bungalow was being readied for Mr Kadri to move in on the afternoon of March 1) was, in the developing circumstances, not at all safe for those belonging to the minority Muslim community. Despite the presence of a large police force, including members of the State Reserve Police (SRP) in the area, various incidents of looting and arson had taken place including the burning of a Muslim owned restaurant, “Tasty”, in front of the block where the Chief Justice’s residence is located. [Personal communication by Justice Ravani]

Extraordinarily, even officials belonging to Military Intelligence told Justice Kadri that he should not rely on the local police for his safety and that he should consider moving to the military guesthouse in the cantonment area where they could ensure his safety! Meanwhile, news came through that the house of Justice A. Divecha, a retired High Court Judge and a former Chairman, MRTP Commission, who happened to be a Muslim, was ransacked and burnt by a mob forcing him to leave it. The circumstances forced Justice Kadri to move to his sister-in-law’s flat in Rivera Apartment, near Tagore Hall, located in a predominantly Muslim area.

The experience of Justice Kadri and his family raises fundamental questions. How was it possible for looting and arson to take place in the very area where senior judges lived and where there was more than adequate presence of the police? It is a well-established fact (and an accepted principle of police peace-keeping) that a couple of armed policemen can easily disperse a mob of a thousand. Here there were more than enough armed policemen to cope with mobs in the several thousands, yet not only the Judges themselves feared for the lives of fellow Muslims judges, but military intelligence also confirmed the validity of their fears! How is it that neither the High Court itself nor the residences of Muslim judges, active or retired, could be protected? Why is it that the State government and police did not fulfill their Constitutional responsibilities to protect the Judiciary, its functioning, its safety, and thereby its substantive independence? For two full days, the Constitution of the Republic of India was suspended in the heart of the capital city of Gujarat, even for the members of the Highest Judiciary in the State. The rule of law vanished and only the military arm of the Republic was prepared and able to guarantee life, liberty and safety of a high court judge, and that too only within the cantonment area! Given the events detailed in this case how is it possible to avoid the conclusion that there was State and Police complicity with respect to the violence that was taking place and directed against Muslims, including senior Muslim Judges?

---

Box 8: The Terms of Reference of the K.G. Shah Commission of Enquiry

On March 6 2002, the Government of Gujarat announced the setting up of a one-man commission headed by retired Justice K.G. Shah to look into the recent communal violence in Gujarat. The terms of reference of this commission of enquiry are compared below with those of the Justice Jaganmohan Reddy commission of enquiry into the Ahmedabad riots of 1969 and those of the Justice Srikrishna commission of enquiry into the Mumbai riots of 1992.

Shah Commission: Terms of Reference (2002)

To ascertain

· The facts, circumstances and the course of events of the incidents that led to setting on fire of some coaches of the Sabarmati Express train on February 27, 2002 near Godhra railway station.

· The facts, circumstances and course of events of the subsequent incidents of violence in the State in the aftermath of the Godhra incident.

· The adequacy of administrative measures taken to prevent and deal with the disturbances in Godhra and subsequent disturbances in the State.

· To ascertain as to whether the incident at Godhra was pre-planned and whether information was available with the agencies, which could have been used to prevent the incident.

· To recommend suitable measures to prevent recurrence of such incidents in future.

Jaganmohan Reddy Commission: Terms of Reference (1969)

To ascertain

· The causes and course of the communal disturbances, which took, place at Ahmedabad and generally in other parts of the state of Gujarat on and after 18th September 1969.

· The adequacy of the administrative measures taken to prevent and deal with the said disturbances.

· Measures, which may be adopted to prevent recurrence of such disturbances.

· Other matters relating to the communal disturbances in the state as may be germane to the above.

Srikrishna Commission: Terms of Reference (1992)

To ascertain

· The circumstances, events and immediate causes of the incidents which occurred in Bombay Police Commissionerate area in December 1992 on or after the 6th December 1992 and again in January 1993 on or after the 6th January 1993.

· Whether any individual or group of individuals or any other organisation, were responsible for such events and circumstances.

· The adequacy, or otherwise, of the precautionary and preventive measures, taken by the police preceding the aforesaid incidence.

· Whether the steps taken by the police in controlling the riots were adequate and proper and whether the police firing resulting in deaths was justified or not.

· The measures, long and short term, which are required to be taken by the administration to avoid recurrence of such incidents, to secure communal harmony and also to suggest improvements in law and order machinery.

· The circumstances and the immediate cause of the incidents commonly referred to as the serial bomb-blasts of the 12th March 1993, which occurred in the Bombay police commissionerate area.

· Whether these last incidents had any common link with incidents mentioned at the first point above.

· Whether all these incidents were part of a common design.

Comments

First, it is noteworthy that the Justice Shah Commission is a single man commission unlike the Jaganmohan Reddy commission, which was a three-man commission with two of its members from the minority community. Further, Justice Shah is a retired judge in poor health. Given the gravity of the recent incidents of communal violence in Gujarat, it is obvious that there should be a three member Commission led by a serving judge of the Supreme Court of India with two of its members from the minority community. Since the Narendra Modi Government and its agencies have been widely perceived to have colluded with the massive violation of human rights of the minority community in the recent communal riots in Gujarat, it is necessary for the Central Government to set up the Commission and to include the role of the State Government in the riots as part of the terms of reference of the Commission of Enquiry.

Second, the terms of reference (TOR) of the Shah Commission attaches conspicuously less importance to the serious incidents in Ahmedabad and elsewhere as compared to its concern over what happened in Godhra. Third, while the element of pre-planning, if any, behind the Godhra incidents is to be looked into, the need to adopt a similar approach in regard to the incidents in Ahmedabad and elsewhere, is conspicuously ignored. This is in marked contrast to the TOR of the Srikrishna commission of enquiry which was specifically mandated to ascertain whether “any individual or group of individuals or any other organisation, were responsible” for the incidents. Finally, the issue of setting out restitution, compensation, rehabilitation and guarantees of non-repetition as benchmarks should be included in the terms of reference.

Thus, the Shah commission of enquiry into the recent incidents of communal violence in Gujarat, as it stands, fails to inspire confidence and should be rejected.

---

Box 9: Interview with a RSS Baudhik Pracharak

The 56 years old RSS Baudhik pracharak stated that he had seen Hindu-Muslim riots since childhood. He was convinced that the reason for this was that the Muslim population in Ahmedabad is relatively high and Muslims are concentrated in Jamalpur and other parts of the Old City. This riot he believed was the second after the one in 1969 where Hindus have been dominant. He confidently said that after 27th February when 58 persons were killed in Godhra, the riots came as a reaction to that event. He said that ninety five per cent of the riots have been started by Muslims. Godhra had been pre-planned by the ISI. The media had been one-sided, according to him, since they had not interviewed relatives of the killed passengers. Further, the media had not exposed Pakistan’s role. The ‘Hindu hurt’ had been aggravated by media role. He was critical of the assertion that the riots were well planned. He said that these were beyond the control of the Sangh Parivar and were a spontaneous reaction to Godhra: “We can attract the masses but not wholly control them.” Thus the mobs were made up of local people. In C.G. Road, upper class people, including women participated. There was a focused attack on Muslim properties not just looting. Youth of 18-20 years were more active. In Ahmedabad, Muslims were more pro-Pakistan and he said that Muslims must assimilate into Hindu society. With Muslim entry into some housing colonies, Hindus were gradually selling off their flats and there had been changes in the character of the locality where Muslims lived. He said he did not know why Muslims leaned towards Pakistan. He also stated that the current riots are organized by the Congress (I). The Congress (I) was doing this to win over Muslims.

The Pracharak repeatedly stated that Muslims were responsible for the current rioting and that the media was biased, excluding Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar. He was angry with TV: Star, Zee, Aaj Tak for their biased role, including media-person Prabhu Chawla. He believed that minor sporadic riots would continue. He denied allegations that the riots were politically and electorally motivated. He admitted however that if this had not happened, elections for the BJP would have been difficult. Even now elections would be difficult. He believed that Hindus have suffered economically more, but Muslims are psychologically demoralised and their pro-Pakistan activities will be curbed for 4-5 years.

The Baudhik Pracharak believed that the Hindus are scared of a backlash. Fear and problems of alienation will continue. The problem is with Muslim religious and political leaders not the masses. As far as the media is concerned, including Gujarat Samachar and Sandesh, they are “yellow journalists” and have primarily economic interests. He denied reports of VHP-RSS-Bajrang Dal involvement, including those concerning the presence of Ministers in control rooms.

To the question if Muslims fester in camps would not there be a danger of terrorism? he replied “I do not know. We did not create the problem.” When asked if the ISI was behind the Godhra attack, hadn’t the ensuing communal violence and divide, economic disruption and the damage to Gujarat and to India’s image, been a great success for the ISI? he agreed, but blamed the riots on the Muslims and the media. He believed that Gujarat would rebound economically soon, as minor riots and clashes will not affect the economy and business.

The ultimate solution to the problems with the Muslims, the Pracharak said, was the annihilation of Pakistan.

Interview carried out by Kamal Mitra Chenoy.

(Subhas Chowk, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 26/3/2002).

---

Box 10: On Police Transfers

On March 24, the Gujarat administration transferred 27 police officers in the State. Clearly, the police officers who took firm positions against the marauding VHP and Bajrang Dal mobs faced the ire of the Modi Government. Others who maintained a purposeful inaction and were partisan towards the mobs or were spotted abetting them were rewarded with key and important postings.

The state Director General of Police, A.K. Chakravarty, was not consulted about the transfers, since these were done completely at the behest of the political leadership. Chakravarty objected to these transfers and wrote to the additional chief secretary that four IPS officers were being transferred for fulfilling their constitutional obligations. He stated that such transfers would demoralize the police force.

The SP of Kachch, Vivek Srivastava was transferred because he arrested the area’s Home Guards Commandant, Akshay Thakkar, a member of the VHP, local VHP leader Vasant Patel and a Shiv Sena pramukh for attacking the priest of a Dargah in the area. The State Home Minister Gordhan Zadaphia, a hardcore VHP man and an appointee of VHP leader Praveen Togadia, called Srivastava asking him to drop the charges. This was folowed by a call from the Chief Minister’s office. Since he did not comply, Srivastava was transferred. After his transfer communal violence has erupted in Kachch as well.

Rahul Sharma, who had been transferred as SP of Bhavnagar recently, took strong measures to stop rioting mobs in Bhavnagar on March 1. He resorted to some rounds of firing himself and rescued over 400 Muslims who were attacked by a mob near a madrassa in Akuada. He took strong action against the mob leaders like Shiv Sena’s Kishore Bhatt. Sharma has been transferred.

Other police officers like DCP P.B. Gondhia, who had named BJP MLA Maya Kodnani and VHP leader Jaideep Patel in his FIR on the Naroda-Patia massacre in Ahmedabad has been shunted out to civil defence.

On the other hand, R.J. Savani, who is reportedly close to the VHP, has been appointed DCP (Crime) while Sanjay Gadhvi, a friend of Togadia has replaced Gondhia as DCP (Zone IV), Ahmedabad.

P.N. Barot who has been chosen by the Government to investigate the two worst outbreaks in Ahmedabad in Naroda and Chamanpura has on record questioned the veracity of the FIRs registered.

Clearly, the Modi Government has made every attempt to control and communalise the police force.

---

Box 11: No Preventive Arrests

(Reported in the Indian Express, Ahmedabad Edition, March 6, 2002, page 1)

Preventive Arrests on February 27th After the Godhra Incident in Ahmedabad

Police Station Arrests

Naroda 0
Gomtipur 0
Shaherkotda 0
Vejalpur 0
Kalupur 0
Gaekwad Haveli 0
Eliss Bridge 0
Navrangpura 0
Naranpura 0
Ghatlodia 0
Astodia 2

---

Appendix 1: Secret Circular of Gujarat Police

To
All Police Commissioners
All District Police Officers
&
For Information: Police Ahmedabad
All range IGPs/DIGPS

From: Director of Police (Intelligence)
Gujarat State, Ahmedabad

Ref.:D.2/2,Com/Muslim/Activity/84/99 of 1/2-2-99

You are asked to intimate the details of persons (Muslims) involved in communal riots which occurred in your city/district during the last five years viz (1) offence registration No. (2) Section (3) Place (4) What judgement by court? (5) How many times the person is booked under CRPC Section 107, 151, 110 or PASA, NASA?
Please submit the dossier of criminals and persons with communal mentality.
Please prepare the complete dossier and send with special messenger about branches of Students Islamic Movement of India located in your district/Cities with the names, addresses telephone numbers of the office bearers and active workers. The details of addresses of offices also be given.
Please intimate how many Darul Ulams are functioning in your districts/cities where the same are located.
The boys and girls studying there belong to which Country/State/District and their numbers.
Details and types of degree awarded. Whether the same are recognised by the Government. and from which foreign countries they receive assistance and quantum of the same.
Please intimate the details of existing Muslim organizations in your district/ with their address and who ar