By Ishaal Zehra
On February 22, 2016 nearly all the media carried the same
headlines quoting Narendra Modi, the prime minister of India as saying, “(Some
people) could not digest the simple fact as to how a tea vendor went on to
become Prime Minister. This has not gone down well with them… their only aim is
how to finish Modi, how to destabilise Modi government and how to throw muck on
Modi”. Quite interesting, the man who is famous for hatching conspiracies
against Muslims in India is complaining about being conspired against.
February is the month where in the year 2002 the Gujarat riots
occurred. It was a devastating three-day period of communal violence in Gujarat
by extremist Hindus under the guidance and command of Narinder Modi. More than
2,000 Muslims were murdered, and tens of thousands rendered homeless in
carefully planned and coordinated attacks of unprecedented savagery. The
Guardian reported that the slayers of Muslims were even seen smashing the
heads of children against rocks.
The riots began after some 60 Hindu pilgrims died when a train
carrying them was set on fire. On 27 February 2002, the Sabarmati Express train
was stopped outside Godhra station because of the emergency chain being pulled.
The train was then attacked and four coaches were burned by a large mob. It has
been alleged that the attack was the result of a conspiracy hatched by local
Muslims. 58 people, including some Hindu pilgrims who were returning from the
holy city of Ayodhya, were said to be trapped and killed in the burning train.
Interestingly it took Government of Gujarat only 10 hours to
declare that the burning of S6 Coach of Sabarmati Express at Godhra was the
result of a pre-planned conspiracy to kill karsevaks but it took them another
full year to name the fuel that was used to “burn down” the Coach. From the
first charge-sheet to second and third by Noel Parmar, the second Investigation
officer the fuel name was changed to petrol from kerosene. Another proof of the
SIT being genuine was the guy named Ranjit Singh Patel, the key police witness
in the Sabarmati train case, who spilled his beans in a sting operation carried
out by Tehelka revealeing that he was paid Rs. 50 thousand to name Salim
Panwala and two other accused at the behest of the Investigating Officer Shri
Noel Parmer. This admission by Ranjit Patel demolishes his earlier statement
before the Police that he had sold 140 litres of Petrol to Salim.
This incident is perceived as the trigger for the widespread riots
that followed in Godhra as well as the rest of Gujarat in which more than two
thousand individuals died, thousands more were rendered homeless and property
worth hundreds of crores was lost.
On 21 May 2002 Gujarat government set up a commission to probe the
train fire and the riots. That commission exonerated Gujarat's Chief Minister
Narendra Modi over the deadly religious riots that followed the blaze. He was
accused of failing to halt the religious violence and some opponents said he
indirectly encouraged some of the Hindu rioters. But the commission dismissed
these allegations. Obviously the state commission was set up with the intention
of giving a clean chit to its state minister.
The twist came when Justice UC Banerjee submitted his report on 3
March 2006 saying the train fire was an accident. While Justice Nanavati's
report presented on 25 September 2008 described the train burning as a
"conspiracy". "There is absolutely no evidence to show that
either the chief minister or any of the ministers in his council or police
officers played any role in the Godhra incident," Justice GT Nanavati had
concluded in his report.
BBC News article quoted a senior
police officer's sworn statement to India's Supreme Court who alleged that
Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi deliberately allowed anti-Muslim riots in
the state. Sanjiv Bhatt says he attended a meeting at which Mr. Modi is alleged
to have said that the Hindus should be allowed to vent their anger.
Sanjiv Bhatt was a senior
police officer in the Gujarat intelligence bureau during the 2002 riots.
In a sworn statement to the
Supreme Court, he said that his position allowed him to come across large amounts
of information and intelligence both before and during the violence, including
the actions of senior administrative officials.
He also alleges that, in a
meeting in the night before the riots, Mr. Modi told officials that the Muslim
community needed to be taught a lesson following an attack on a train carrying
Hindu pilgrims.
The Amicus report 2011 also strongly disagrees with the SIT's view
that no case against the Gujarat Chief Minister was made out. It says that only
the cross-examination of senior Gujarat police officers, including Sanjiv Bhatt
could establish whether the Chief Minister was innocent or guilty.
Significantly, the report also says that Mr. Bhatt's statement was
made probable by the presence of two Ministers in the Ahmedabad Police Control
Room (PCR) at the time Muslims were being attacked. The killers may have been
in touch with police and politicians.
In a sting carried out in 2007 by the weekly magazine Tehelka,
politicians, businessmen, officials and policemen were caught on tape,
delightedly recalling how they murdered and raped Muslims with the full
imprimatur of their superiors.
That was all probably not
enough, the SIT recommended closing the case against Mr. Modi on the grounds
that police officer Bhatt, who was vital to fixing blame on the Chief Minister,
was a controversial and unreliable witness. The SIT also concluded that there
was no material on record to show interference by the two Ministers who were
present in the PCR when Muslims were being attacked across Ahmedabad.
Defending himself against
accusations over the 2002 riots, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi asserted
that his government used its “full strength” to “do the right thing” and he had
no guilty feeling.
In an interview to the newswire
Reuters later, he said people had the “right to be critical in a democracy,”
but he did not have any guilty feeling. He said he was sad about the riots,
adding he would be sad even if a “puppy” came under a car…”. “People have a
right to be critical. We are a democratic country. Everyone has his own view,”
he said.
Pankaj Mishra very well described the situation in the land called
India. In his article in ‘The guardian’ he says, “In any case, the
non-recurrence of 2002-style killings in India provides little reason to credit
its elites with heightened tolerance and compassion. Left behind by economic
growth, Muslims are more demoralised and depressed than ever; and the country's
extreme inequalities, often enforced with violence, express themselves in new
forms, ranging from suicides by tens of thousands of farmers, to militant
insurgencies. Old-style rioting has been replaced by state terrorism, often
cheer-led by the elites.
Sad Indeed!
No comments:
Post a Comment