Indian General Elections 2014
Gujarat Riots, Human Rights Violations
and Narendra Modi
Dr. Mozammel Haque
There
was a lecture on Gujarat: Human Rights Violations, Impunity and Indian General
Elections at the London School of Economics (LSE) on 19 February, 2014. The
participants were Dr. Shakuntala Banaji, Lecturer in the Department of Media
and Communications at the LSE’ , Carla Ferstman, director of REDRESS, Suresh
Grover, director of the Monitoring Group; he has been active in the civil
rights field for over thirty years. The Guardian Newspaper has described as one
of the most influential people in social policy in the UK and Dr. Biji Mathew
an Associate Professor of Business and American Studies at Rider University, NJ
and co-founder./ convener of the Coalition Against Genocide (CAG). The
discussion was chaired by Professor Chetan Bhatt, Director of the Centre for
the Study of Human Rights and Professor of Sociology at the LSE.
Suresh Grover
Mr.Suresh
Grover, Director of the Monitoring Group, talking about Gujarat riots in 2002 said,
“Had the local police acted professionally these murders could have been
prevented. The initial attack on the jeep and the subsequent chase of the
victim by the mob was done within eyeshot of the police who were no more than
200 yards away.”
“Perpetrators
were never interviewed and charged until April that year. Even the serious cases
of charges, bail was granted to the culprit without any objection from public
prosecutor; later it turned out that they were well-known members of the Sangha
Seva;” said Mr. Grover.
Human
Rights Watch published a report on Gujarat riots in May, 2002. Mentioning about
that report, Mr. Grover said, “What happened in Gujarat is not any spontaneous uprising;
it was carefully orchestrated attacks against Muslims. It was planned in
advance and organised extensive participation of the police claimed by Imran
Daud in Indian Courts. I viewed and others show clear evidence of culpability against
Narendra Modi and others; that evidence is quite extensive and can be
summarised as follows:
“In
total opposition to the values of equality enshrined in the Indian
Constitution; Sangha Seva arise with that ideology with the ultimate aim of
creating a Hindu state. There is clear evidence to show that all the affiliates
of Sangha Parivar took active part in the anti-Muslim genocide in 2002 with the
full support of the chief minister. Policy pursued by the BJP as soon as they
view the far in Gujarat in 1998 reflected the systematic marginalisation,
exclusion and targeting of minority communities including the Muslim community
in Gujarat.”
Mr.
Grover cited an instance. He said, “In 1998 the state department set up a
police cell monitoring inter-religious marriages. This was justified by the
then Home Minister Haren Pandey on the ground that such marriages were not made
out of free choice but force unto them. This disbanding the police cell
investigate the atrocities and violence against women.”
Mr.
Grover spoke about the withdrawing policy of Muslim police officers from the
field as early as 1998. He said, “From 1998 onwards there was a withdrawing policy
of Muslims police officers for field posts as far as possible. There was also a
size up normal recruitment process by police by appointing police sevak who are
a care of the Sangha Parivar. Sangha Parivar was later drafted into police
service thereby subverting the recruitment procedure. Gujarat government also
used the Home Guard Force as a mean to induct VHP and Bajrang Dal Cadre in a
law enforcing machineries. in compliance and obedience to the Sangha Parivar thereby
subverting the rule of law and all constitutional norms.”
Speaking
on the Ayodhya agitation to demolish the Babri Masjid, Mr. Grover mentioned,
“On 15th of January 2002 VHP announced the mass mobilisation in
Gujarat for its Ayodhya agitation to demolish the Babri Masjid. This was
organised in a movement of thousands of Kar Sevaks from Gujarat to Ayodhya. On
the 7th of February, the state intelligence bureau alerted the
police commissioners of police of a movement of kar Sevaks in under 27th
of February to Ayodhya. State intelligence services also repeatedly alerted the
Uttar Pradesh government and their police authorities and the number of Kar
Sevaks left for Ayodhya by train. Massive necessary preventive action could
have been taken against any incident of violence when Kar Sevaks returned from
Ayodhya.”
Mr.
Grover mentioned about the Ahmedabad Express train for Ayodhya. He said, “When
the Ahmedabad Express its journey for Ayodhya it was carrying a 200,000
passengers on board almost double the capacity of 110,000 people nearly 1700 of
these were Kar Sevaks. Media and the press reported incidence of violence
occurred in UP, New Delhi and clashes between the Kar Sevaks and the local
population at different places. These could have been a cause of concern and ought
to have alerted the state intelligence to take preventative measures but no
such measures were considered or implemented.”
The
27th of February 2002 at about 8.00am 6 coaches of the Express
burned down resulting in the tragic deaths of 58 people mostly Hindus. Because
of the burning of the coach injuries judicially ascertained. “There was no
evidence burning of the carriages was pre-planned. The local district collector
of Godra Jayant Virabhi issued a statement which was broadcast repeatedly for eleven
hours from 7am to 6.00pm on that day to the fact that Godhra fire was not pre
planned, probably an accident,” Mr Grover said and added, “In reality, despite
the social media had reported the incident Gujarat was relatively peaceful on
27th of February.”
Mr.
Grover gave a detailed description how the peaceful situation suddenly turned
into nightmare by the mishandling of the event by Narendra Modi and his
government. “Narendra Modi and some of his cabinet members had arrived at
around 2.00pm on that day. Based on the advice of the local administration, Modi
took a decision to transport the charred bodies of the passengers to Ahmedabad.
The initial plan was not to remove the bodies from the plain to capital. However,
to gain maximum publicity and media coverage he and his colleagues decided to
take the bodies in an open car Chevrolet to Ahmedabad at7:30pm on that day.”
“Without
any evidence to back it Modi made a public statement in which he announced ‘the
ISI the Pakistan Intelligence Service is responsible and behind the Godra
incident’. Despite Godhra as I quote, “pre-planned violent act of terrorism” On
the same day in an interview Praveen Togadia, International General Secretary
of the VHP, stated that this has never happened in the history of Independent India.
Hindu society will avenge the whole killings. Muslims should set the fact that
Hindus are not wearing bungles. We will response vigorously to all such
incidence. Next day, Modi said on Doordarshan, the Indian State
Television, Gujarat shall not tolerate any such incident. Culprit will get full
punishment for this sin. Not only this, he will set an example that nobody, not
in his dreams, thinks of committing the heinous crime like this.”
Statements
on the basis of the pogrom of a genocidal intent against all Muslims of
Gujarat. Mr. Grover also mentioned, “In order to facilitate the spread of violence
in Gujarat and the rest of Gujarat and to paralyse the state machinery, the VHP
called for a state-wide ban. Despite the fact that the course was illegal, Modi,
in total defiance of his constitutional and legal duties, announced and promoted
Gujarat state-wide ban next day. He would have known and foreseen that such
action would lead to a breakdown of the state machinery and the failure to
maintain the rule of law. Indeed, all the reliable evidence suggests that Modi
went further by calling two separate meetings about the official response: first
with senior police officers and second with senior ministers. In both he allegedly
gave specific instructions that resulted in the complete absence of police
actions and interventions against mobs and wanton violence against Muslim
community on 28 February, 2002.”
Speaking
about the role of police officers, Mr. Grover said, “1ndeed central police
control rooms were taken over by at least two Cabinet members, Ashok Bhatt and
IK Jadeja in direct violations of normal procedure. As a consequence repeated
police help were ignored and turned down by the police. The gross political
interference was also used to monitor these responsible two police officers and
also to ensure the release of mob leaders and known-supporters of Sangha
Parivar. Although the army was called in, it is deliberately not deployed for
the first 72 hours. Had the army been deployed properly the threat of violence
would have subsided.”
What
happened during this carnage, Mr. Grover gave a pathetic, pitiable and dismal
picture. He said, “The carnage resulted in large scale death sacrileges
befallen to the Muslim community. Gruesome and brutal rape against Muslim women
was widespread. Violence against women and children were deployed in systematic
manner, women’s bodies were made the grounds that symbolises the subjugation of
the entire Muslim population. There was widespread destruction of properties,
decimation of the places of worship and the cultural symbols. There is an
estimate that across Gujarat 110,000 Muslims hotels and homes, not less than
100,000 families. Over 15,000 small or bigger business establishments, over
3,000 hand carts, 5,000 vehicles were badly damaged and violence took that toll
of 2,000 murdered Muslims in 2002.”
Carla Ferstman, Director REDRESS
Carla Ferstman is a human rights activist
and political analyst and working in an area of international criminal law. She
made her comment coming from that perspectives. Ms. Ferstman argued first, “Modi
has been rather untouched. Internationally, there has also been a number of processes
and although that is little bit more, in
particular, there has been in the United
Kingdom a request for an arrest warrant
of Modi in 2003. That did not succeed on the face of it. It had to do with it the
insufficiency of evidence.”
“Several travel bans have been put in place
which has been lifted or wavering which one can debate interpret which we are
with some that. On the basis of that Governmental was very keen to smooth
relations in case Modi is indeed being elected. It is quite interesting in that
respect. Given that travel bans were put in place for one purpose which was in
response to mass violations and somehow they are now being removed for being
very different reasons, economic reasons which we need to consider a little bit
further,” observed by Ms. Ferstman.
Ms. Ferstman touched on few issues; the first
one has to do with the local accountability process and consider what the
actual extra-territorial effect of the local accountability process is or might
be? She said, “If Modi was investigated and prosecuted with the verdict of not
guilty founded down by the Indian courts which we know that does not go with that
effect. Courts in other countries have to follow these verdicts. If something
less than full investigations and prosecutions happened, what weight would be
given to that domestic process internationally? This is quite a critical
question in light of the ongoing allegations and the fact that we are talking
about potentially committed crime against humanity, crime committed internal
conflict, torture, rape, sexual violations – all range of crimes which give
rise to international obligations to investigate and prosecute. There is a
court in another country that has to consider the allegations against Modi. If
you are tried once can be tried again. I think it is important to know firstly,
which has already been said there is no trial.”
The
second issue that Ms Ferstman wanted to raise briefly is about the travel ban.
She said, “2002 violence led to de facto travel ban imposed on Modi in a number
of countries including the UK and certainly the United States and European
Union has been in motion in that direction. Travel bans are part of the much
wider sets of some restrictive measures that can be imposed to target
governments, or non-state entities or also individuals. Other types of
restrictive measures we can think of might be arms embargo, trade restrictions,
financial restrictions and also visa ban in addition to general travel ban.
Travel ban I can say it is easy diplomatic approach in general state have
control over who they can let in; or banning someone or denying someone; entry
is a matter which is within their prerogative.”
Dr. Shakuntala Banaji
Dr.
Shakuntala Banaji, Lecturer at the LSE, first of all starting saying about the
social context. She said, “what we note in India an aggressive patriarchcal
family masculinity violent; structured which actually excludes the voices of
children and young people; which excludes the voices of many many men and
women; which excludes people from public places where people from certain
caste, certain class do not feel welcome whether they are shaking their way; we
have allowed them to come and to play.”
Secondly
she mentioned about the normalisation of violence; Inter-penetration of
Right-wing Hindu Chauvinist (Hindutva) in position of power; growth of Hindutva
propaganda machinery with new media and in the west all for investment and vicious
gap between rich minority and poor majority, which means you have a massive
disenfranchised population who are not on twitter, who are not on face book and
who are very rarely appeared in the urban middle class debate.
Motifs of the Pro-Modi campaign
Dr.
Banaji the explained the motifs of the Pro-Modi campaign. She said, “Politicians
from other parties are corrupt. You
know secular; we need to try something new; Modi; he gives hope. The Congress
Party is led by inexperienced young man from wealthy family. Like him Modi shows
strength; he does not flinch when something tough has to be done. Hindu nation, at a time, when politically
correct secular; Modi proudly stand up and call themselves Hindutva. He has
done 20 years sitting on the pit. We need to remember things that happened 600
years ago. This is an absolute Hindu campaign. Hindutva campaign. We need to
think about Temple which was burnt 600 years ago. We need to think about
rewriting the story written in 1400 years ago but we must forget what happened
12 years ago. We must forget in order to move forward as a nation because we
absolutely have to move forward.”
Dr. Banaji also argued, “Hindu-right is
absolutely wonderful and embracing new media absolutely hats off to them.
Nobody on the other side can compete. Modi supporters are absolutely ubiquitous
on twitter, in face book, in comment sections; in blogs, in newspapers;
literally everywhere you go. You get the same rhetoric and it’s very very consistent.
My leader, right or wrong stands for development.”
“The
story is building up. The enemies of Modi are somehow basically related to the
Congress and Modi has brand India behind him. He has got money; he is endorsed
by the super rich obviously evidently billions of business. So he is here embracing
one of the richest men in India. He has vibrant Gujarat. Everything is really
really well,” said Dr. Banali.
Concluding her speech, Dr. Banali said, “Finally
we need to look forward with a little bit of caution what is coming in the next
ten years. Democracy is being dismantled in front of our eyes. It is the media which
is the fourth pillar of democracy; we have allowed this to happen; a single
narrative was not uncontested and it is now. So we need to invent a new
metaphor; a quickly. We need to have new framework we have to put out there to
contest this narrative. We have to think beyond those strong man; good business
for it. We need to think about when we can reassemble something which India has
always has very strong grassroots democratic culture, non-violence at a time when
media was not there either on twitter or face book.”
Dr. Biji Mathew
Dr. Biji Mathew talked about the media
supports for Modi. He explained how the kind of media supports Modi’s potential
prime ministerial candidate. He described the three trajectories that produce
this Modi moment.
Talking about how the business class
promoted Modi, Dr. Mathew said, “That the base of business running
economy slowed down and therefore what is required is somebody who has
potential for more authoritarian kind of implementation of new liberalism
agenda. I think it is a very clear signal that has come from the business elite
that we need somebody like Modi. Strong man like Modi who has pushed back
social movements; social movement in the weakest state like Gujarat. Modi is
projected as the big development chief minister; the big business chief
minister.”
Speaking about the media supports of Modi,
Dr. Mathew maintained, “If you want to understand the media; how the media, specially the electronic media
structured in terms of business houses or which part of it The part of what is
happening, I think the part which is happening is that Modi is being promoted
as such not so much because of his actual achievement in the ground of positive
production or better development but much more because he has managed to crush
opposition and managed to crush social movement and the landscape of Gujarat is
probably the best example for it. And that vector arises out of particular
business elite wanting that kind of environment.”
Dr. Mathew pointed out about the VHP and
Sangha Parivar. He said, “The second vector is the vector that is VHP, Sangh
Parivar for a really long time. And this one is the vector around caste. The
Hindutva movement is identified with the Hindutva Brahmic movement; the Vedic and
Brahmanic Hindus and in that context the second vector that has not been fully
played out but I anticipate might get played out in the next two months before
the elections come in. The vector around Modi is being projected as an OBC
candidate because if you look at the RSS; if you look at the BJP elections
strategy, caste and caste-based mobilisation of various societies, not the
progressive caste but the caste based mobilisation have become in one sense or
other one of the bulwarks against Hindus. Especially if you look at the
regional parties launching and how the bricks down caste is one the of the
bulwark against Hindus.”
No comments:
Post a Comment