Fear Factor in Gujarat

If it were not so tragic, the story of the Gujarat riots might have qualified for an edge-of-the-seat thriller. Witnesses are either coming out of the woodwork or turning hostile. Every accusation is termite-like eating into the riots case.


Recently, IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt testified against chief minister Narendra Modi’s role when he alleged that he was there at a late-night meeting on February 27, 2002, when the CM gave instructions to let Hindus “vent out their anger” and for Muslims to be “taught a lesson” after the Godhra train burning. His words were not new, but because of his position it did cause a stir. Besides, there were questions about the veracity of his claim. They said he was not present at the meeting. And there is also the question as to why the Special Investigative Team (SIT) did not call him for questioning. This was his position. One might ask why he did not proffer such information through other channels. It is likely that he would have lost his job or been transferred, which he was. Is he safe now?

According to a press conference held today, April 30, he has said:

“I can tell the Nanavati Commission that (about what he has said in the affidavit) and much more because I was privy to much more. When I approached the Supreme Court with an affidavit, I submitted to the honourable court that I know much more which I can reveal to the court when I am called upon to do so. If this commission is interested in finding out the truth and if I am given an opportunity to speak out the truth, then I can come out with all the facts that I know and can recollect at this point of time.”

He asked for security and got it. Now, some reports say that as per a notice from the DGP’s office he had to return the vehicles and ammunition. If the government is clean about its intentions, then does it have to worry about what an IPS officer who was not around, as they claim, has to say?

What do all these twists reveal besides delaying the process of justice to suit different stories at varied intervals and the fact that one needs an “opportunity to reveal the truth”?

Yasmeenbano Shaikh is the latest. She is a key witness in the Best Bakery case and earlier this week has moved the Mumbai high court against activist Teesta Setalvad who she contends misguided her. It is important to note that she had already written a letter to the Chief Justice of the Mumbai High Court on June 17, 2010. Her petition states:

“Yasmeen gave false deposition against the accused and identified them falsely at the behest and advice of Teesta Setalvad only in the false hope that she (Teesta) would help her financially…Yasmeen was obsessed with the idea of getting money from Teesta and hence she did not think much about the repercussions of her false deposition against innocent persons. She is however repenting now.”

The Best Bakery which was torched in the 2002 riots was owned by her father-in-law; her husband was injured and later died due to illness. She was witness to the carnage. Therefore, while she now says she is being manipulated for “ulterior motives”, will she deny that the bakery was burned down and people died? Does she know who did it, if she says that her testimony is false and innocents were implicated because of it? If she is expressing concern for the nine people who have been given a life sentence, then does she have similar feelings for the families of the 14 people who died in that fire?

Her letter was also sent to the Chief Justice of India, the chairman of the National Human Rights Commission and the Director General of Police, Gujarat. Why was there silence for 10 months if there was a good case to be followed? The DGP would have jumped at such an opportunity.

Is it her personal trauma that is making her do this – she lost her house to her husband’s second wife and had to live with her mother? Is there a political machinery using her and that could include the politics of activism? As she said about her time in Mumbai:

“Rais Khan (who has since also accused Teesta) and Teesta Setalvad kept strict observation on the flat in which we were residing, we were not able to go out and no one was allowed to meet us. Neither were we having mobile nor were we allowed to talk to anybody, even if we requested. We were not permitted to open the window of the room. Dhyansingh or sometimes Pradip, working in the office of Teesta Setalvad, used to stay for 24 hours there. They used to fulfill our requirements as well as keeping watch on us.”

After all this, why did she still go along? She says she was being tutored regarding what to say in the court by the activist as well as public prosecutor Manjula Rao. Is this not standard legal procedure where the lawyer advises regarding how the case should be dealt with?

One has to be certain as to how a woman who says she signed papers she had no knowledge of can now write letters to the powerful and mighty. She has made some very serious allegations:

“I was removed from the house the very next day of the pronouncement of judgement. I came to know that in the name of Best Bakery Case and for arranging deposition of persons like us, Teesta has collected lakhs of rupees and nothing was given to us.”

How does she know about the existence of this money, where it has come from and for what? Is it from the Gujarat government as compensation? Is it from human rights organisations? Is it from philanthropic institutes? Is it from well-wishers? Is it from outside agencies? Had she got a piece of the pie would she have continued to keep quiet and then what would have happened to her guilt and sorrow? Has no one told her that only one person’s deposition cannot result in such a huge sentence for the accused?

Having said this, it is difficult to ensure that victims are not used. The cases have been dragging on precisely because a closure would shut shop for many. The Gujarat riots were an intensive experiment at several levels. If Yasmeen could be lured by the activist lobby, then she can just as easily be lured by the political lobby. If she was kept under detention then her open protest could put her in further discomfort, unless she is being protected. She ought to know that legal proceedings can be instituted against her for false deposition, so what makes her unafraid? Is she just another face of Gujarat’s economic ‘miracle’? Or the ugly side of samaritanism?

Is justice about how many versions we have of it? It is important to not make this into a personality issue. No one can get away with any kind of abuse by using their power and position. If there are accusations, then they should be verified and the people made answerable. This should not in any way derail the cases against the role of the government officials.

Part of the problem with the Gujarat riots case is not only the strong establishment lobby but the several human rights organisations that jumped into the fray. There have been ego clashes and questions are naturally raised regarding the positions they take. It is, however, unfair that it becomes a battle against “pseudo secularism”. This is a sneaky modus operandi that may get some applause but does not solve the problem.

(c) Farzana Versey

Published in Countercurrents

Gujarat at the UN, Shiv Sena at Unity

Is it right for an issue that has to do with Indian court cases to be taken to an international organisation? In principle I do not agree. But, the fact is we cannot put strictures on stapled visas to China and who is talking to whom in the North East and Kashmir.

Of course, these are issues of insurgency movements. Gujarat is not. This is the reason why the Supreme Court pulled up activist Teesta Setalvad for reporting to the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council about 10 serious Gujarat riot case proceedings monitored by the highest court. I’d like to counter-question some of the posers by Justices D K Jain, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam:

“It shows you (Teesta) do not have confidence in us. We are monitoring the cases and are here to hear your grievances. Yet, you write to the UN body. Can the international body provide protection to witnesses?”

Does this mean that the witnesses need to be protected? Has the court provided for such protection?

“Can they guide us how to proceed with the cases?”

No. But there is a charter of human rights that have to be followed. It is not to guide the courts; it is to take up the issue of victims.

“You are reporting the day-today proceedings in the Supreme Court and trial courts to that organization as also what the joint commissioner of police does. Is the international body a disciplinary authority for the police?”

No. It can only prepare a report based on the police’s acts of omission and commission.

However, Setalvad ought not to report every detail. There is also the issue of an international organisation getting involved for its own agenda. It is also prudent to ask whether the victims gave the go-ahead. Such cases are delicate in nature and they and their families have to live in the state and deal with people and the authorities on a daily basis.

In the interest of transparency she should also make the communication with the international organisaiton public. One assumes she has shared it with the court by now.

As I had said earlier: This is about Gujarat, not Teesta.

- - -

On Sunday, the 23rd, Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray will celebrate his 84th birthday. The party has decided to mark this occasion as ‘Hindu Ekata’ (unity) day.

This has nothing to do with Hindus or unity, but wih the BMC elections and, as reports say, to embarrass the Congress for bringing up the issue of Hindu terrorism.

The Shiv Sena has the gall to now claim that the saffron coour of its flag is about a blend of various communities and castes as it was during the Bhakti movement.

Perhaps this doha (couplet) by Kabir, the bhakti poet and sage, might be a good birthday gift for Balasaheb:


Bura Jo Dekhan Main Chala, Bura Na Milya Koye
Jo Mann Khoja Apna, To Mujhse Bura Naa Koye

My rough translation:

I sought the wicked ones, but found none
And when I looked within myself, I found none more evil than me

The Mumbai farce: Was I wrong about it?

Mumbai that was beating its breasts over the 26/11 attacks after which high society decided to make the leaders answerable - never mind that some became ‘leaders’ by default (or was it design?) - and was expected to turn out in droves to vote did not do so.

I am not into the ‘I told you so’ business, but the few who felt it necessary to question me, will need to look again at my stand. There are no winners here, except the politicians, any which way you look at it.

This was my first sentence:

If you believe for a moment that the residents of Mumbai are angry about the recent terror attacks, then they have succeeded in fooling you. There is no anger; there is irritation. Their daily routines have been mucked up….

They may cry themselves hoarse at peace marches, they may cry themselves hoarse on panel discussions, they may cry themselves hoarse in petitions that sound like school essays, but their sensitivity is like froth on lager; it will settle down after a few sips.

While film stars and corporate honchos did their walk to the booth, mainly because they had become the visible faces of an advertising campaign, the figures of the city’s voting speak for themselves:

1.59 crore registered voters; less than 70 lakh cast their ballot. That is 43.5%.

Bhiwandi - communally sensitive area - 38.5%
Parts of Mumbai South: Colaba- area closest to the Taj Mahal Hotel - 39%; Cuffe Parade's G D Somani School - whose voter list included some of those who blew hot and cold - 37%

Updated on May 2 for final figures:

Total for Mumbai - 41.28%
Mumbai South - 40.31%
Bhiwandi - 39.39%

Contrast this with the report that states:

Gadchiroli district, where the Naxalites had threatened to chop off fingers if a villager exercised his franchise, recorded 65%

- - -

Will journalists and TV anchors please stop this cutesy act of referring to people with too much familiarity? In this case it became 'Tony' to show just how well they know first-time candidate Mahesh Jethmalani, resident of South Mumbai, contesting from Mumbai North Central.

Last night, commenting on the dismal turnout, he mentioned that even Muslim-dominated areas did not come out to vote. Do you know what his explanation was? “It means that Muslims too are concerned about terrorism.”

What rubbish is this? What does “too” mean? They get killed as well, by professional militant groups and by the terrorising establishment. Only because he has joined the BJP, and mind you his reason was the same “26/11”, he does not need to get all patronising. He even reasons that it shows they did not want to vote for the Congress or any other party, not just the BJP.

Will he go to his society buddies and check whether they voted? And there are turncoats among them who happily started the cry of ‘Enough is enough’ and are now giving the practical perspective about how there is no movement and it is all hollow. If they have been a part of it, then how ‘unhollow’ are they?

Sau billi kha ke ab chhoohein moonh se malai poch kar patli galee se nikal padey (after eating a hundred cats, the rats wiped off the cream from their mouths and made a quick exit).

- - -

Another point I had made at the time was:

No one was talking about the 58 people who died at the local train station or the 10 others who died at the hospital or the taxi driver whose vehicle was burnt and so was he. Or even the cops who took the bullets.

Well, the Citizens for Justice and Peace foundation (CJP) got involved in the fashion week held a while ago for an honourable purpose:

The clothes were later put up for auction on eBay and the proceeds were to go to the Citizens for Justice and Peace foundation (CJP). The theory was that since a majority of the victims of the 26/11 terror attacks on CST died because of lack of ambulances, CJP would use the auction proceeds to buy ambulances that would ply near CST, Churchgate and Dadar. But so far, they have money for only one or two ambulances, according to Teesta Setalvad, secretary of CJP.

So, what happened?

One of the most coveted invites of the last fashion week was to the Naomi Campbell-Vikram Chatwal show, Mai Mumbai. And now it seems like Naomi flew down for nothing; to say nothing of the fruitlessness of getting 38 international designers to donate their outfits. Only eight outfits have been sold, even though the event was promoted in USA, France, Germany, Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines.

Why? Where are all those rich moneybags who don’t even think of manners when they trample on people to get a close- to-the-ramp seat? Who whistle and clap like front benchers watching a kitschy film? Who would otherwise talk of “outfits to die for”? Wasn’t this a cause that mattered so much that they had stood outside the Gateway of India holding candles?

Yet, Ms. Setalvad bravely says:

“I think what is more important is the attention the event has garnered for our project. It was because of this event that we managed three private donors who have offered us Rs 5 lakh each. Let’s not forget there is recession and there are elections in the country for which parties have dried up lot many pools.”

Yes, of course. There is no recession when they fly in their private helicopters? There is no recession for the poor? Rs 5 lakh is like small change for many of them; they would be happy to get rid of it in cash or just get the tax free certificate.

I do stand by my views…and let me end with what I had written, because sometimes, at least sometimes, my truth isn’t too far from what you see:

Today, the people who would run down the elite are speaking up for them; they are all into rubbing shoulders and back-scratching. It is a limited edition utopia: our elite vs. their elite.

This is about Gujarat. Not Teesta

It appears to be just the sort of impetus the Sangh Parivar is looking for.

The Special Investigative Team in Gujarat has submitted a report to the Supreme Court accusing NGOs, and specifically Teesta Setalvad, of "cooking up" (interesting terminology this) stories regarding incidents during the 2002 riots in the state.

There are many who are ready to jump the gun with their one-line verdict of "those bloody NGOs and Teestas and Arundhatis". You know what? All of you who are getting into this mode are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Why? Because it makes you uncomfortable to face the truth and listen to the wails. Because it suits your original POV that it couldn't have been so bad with your poster boy taking Gujarat to Nano-moto heights. This is your fake utopia and that's how you like it.

Now come out of the comfort zone. Forget the NGOs and their "spicing up" for a while. Let's talk facts and ask a few questions:

* Have you wondered about the timing of the release of the SIT report? Why was it not produced earlier?

* If false charges, it is now claimed, were levelled against police chief P.C.Pandey, then why was he together with seven senior officers transferred by the Election Commission's fact-finding group on October 15, 2007?

* If these are false charges, then what about the 78 Muslims who were arrested after the Godhra train burning? What about the Rs 1 crore that was immediately handed over to 25 victims' families?

* Why did the government use the pictures of the burning train to get mileage when the findings tell a different story? What about these falsifications?

To get back to the NGOs, it would be stupid to outright deny that they are capable of exaggeration. However, isn't it puerile to accuse the affidavits of being "stereotypical"? What did the SIT expect - variety in each episode? Isn't one burnt house, a broken limb, a dead person much like any other?

I have said often enough that victims can be used by politicians and anyone with an agenda. Local groups tend to get smothered by outside "well wishers". No one bothers to check on who funds them and why. Everyone is too busy looking for heroes and villains, one or two faces, they can put up as representatives and voices and send on junkets.

Dissent and the citizens' movement have become a farce precisely because of this shameless promotion of selective ideals and morals.

No one gives a damn about the real victims. If you do, then don't curse individuals. Ask yourself whether you had asked these questions when they needed to be asked. It might have been a voice in the wilderness but some of us have ears for it.

---

I cannot provide links due to reasons mentioned in the post below, but there is a detailed piece of mine here dated 30-10-2007.