Ruchika and Media Campaign

Commenting on the famous Mughal-e-Azam song ‘Jab raat hai aisi matwali phir subah ka aalam kya hoga’, M.J. Akbar once wrote,

“I have rarely come across a more startling and poignant metaphor for power.” Elaborating the metaphor he concluded, “Everyone in power is permitted the luxury of just one night, and no one ever believes that the night will come to an end. Deceivers promise a dawn filled with wine, when the truth is that dawn will bring a drug that will put the miracle to sleep. And you will wake up with nothing around you except loss; the mind swooning with the memory of what was, and the mouth bitter with the ash of what might have been.”

S.P. Singh Rathore, former DGP of Haryana and the accused in Ruchika Girhotra molestation case, belongs to Mughal-e-Azam generation and therefore it is safe to assume that he must have watched the epic film. Rathore was 19 when the film was released in 1960 and broke all the records. 30 years later, Rathore forgot the metaphor for power and molested 14-year old lawn tennis player Ruchika in 1990. For the next 19 years, Rathore was so blinded by power that he used all the available means to harass Ruchika’s family and to delay the verdict. It took more than 400 hearings with 40 adjournments to decide that Rathore was indeed guilty of ‘molestation’. (Guinness book of World Records must make a separate chapter on India: Judicial delay. Each year, it will find new records!)

Mainstream media has been totally consumed by Ruchika case. The media is running a campaign titled ‘Justice for Ruchika’. As the principles of journalism stand, it’s not for the media to crusade. The job of the media is just to report facts and not sensationalise it. Witch-hunt of S.P. Singh Rathore is not the job of media. Witch-hunt has never been part of good journalism. Witch-hunt is the duty of law-enforcement agencies and not journalists.

In the recent past, media has run successful campaigns for victims. One such name is Jesica Lall who was shot dead in 1999 by Manu Sharma, son of a Haryana Politician. Manu Sharma was acquitted by lower court in 2006. There was uproar in the media over his acquittal. A powerful media campaign ‘Justice for Jesica’ ensued. Finally Delhi High Court awarded Sharma life imprisonment based on the evidence.

One can argue for media campaign in favour of victims. But a close scrutiny of media’s behavioural pattern reveals it has vested interest in such campaigns. Such media campaigns have only been selective like ‘Justice for Ruchika’ and ‘Justice for Jesica’ although the list of such victims is long. Ishrat Jahan instantly comes to mind. Despite the different nature of the case, nobody can deny the fact that Ishrat Jahan was murdered in fake encounter. S.P. Tamang report, which has been stayed by High Court, has termed the entire operation as “planned” and cold-blooded murder.”

There was no media campaign for Ishrat Jahan. There was no slogan ‘Justice for Ishrat’.
Sohrabuddin Sheikh and Kausar Bi also deserved a media campaign for justice. Their extra-judicial killing is a much larger issue than Ruchika’s case. It’s a different matter that the accused D.G. Vanzara is behind the bars – thanks to Gujarat’s government’s “confession” in Supreme Court.

There was no media campaign for Sohrabuddin Sheikh and Kausar Bi . There was no slogan ‘Justice for Sohrabuddin and Kausar’.

Khawja Yunus case surpasses all limits. 7 years after his mysterious disappearance from police custody, trial is yet to be completed and all the 16 accused are free. There is no doubt that Khawja Yunus was murdered in police custody.

There was no media campaign for Khawja Yunus. There was no slogan ‘Justice for Khawja Yunus’.

Isn’t it strange that Narendra Modi-led BJP government is Gujarat has “confessed” to extra-judicial killings of Sohrabuddin Sheikh and Kausar Bi while the behaviour of Congress-led Maharashtra government in Khawja Yunus has been that of an old confused lady?

Strictly speaking, media should not crusade for any cause. And if it does so, there should not be any selective campaign as it has been argued. There should be no double standards. It is a fact that there was no media campaign when the victim happened to be a Muslim as discussed with three examples above.

The Rajput smile of S.P. Singh Rathore has infected the mainstream media. We hope that media will detoxify it before it becomes a disease! Rathore may have learnt to smile from Jawaharlal Nehru when one is in adversity but he would do well to remember this: Nehru did not smile when he lost China war; nor did he forget the power metaphor of Mughal-e-Azam.

Sunday Inquilab, January 17, 2009

A Judicial Ray of Hope

Shaikh Dastagir, a victim of September 8, 2006 Qabristan blasts

Ashwani Kumar, director of Central Bureau of Investigation, and his committed team of sleuths have suddenly discovered that power is not absolute in a secular democracy. Power comes with responsibility and subject to checks and balances by the short arm of legislators and by the long arm of judiciary. CBI sleuths were so confident of power that they went on to sleep for three long years before being woken up by a judicial bite. Isn’t it amazing that CBI took three years just to utter one sentence – which everybody in Malegaon knows – that accused of Malegaon 2006 blasts are innocent. Had it not been the deep and effective judicial bite of Justice J.N. Patel, CBI would have slept till eternity!

The response of judiciary was quick; Bombay High Court came out with its terse judgment in three months. There was no political response for three long years. Should one assume that the two arms of a democratic republic are in complete disharmony? Should one equate Manmohan Singh-led UPA with notorious CBI? Where PC Chidambaram’s golden-rule of democracy is which he very keen taught to Muslims at Deoband? Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, National Security Advisor and Home Minister must admonish CBI in two words: perform or perish.

Before being bitten by the judicial jaw, CBI had an opportunity to prove and reaffirm nationwide belief that it is indeed country’s most trusted and prestigious investigating agency. CBI had a golden chance to capitalize on the so-called “public outcry” which rose from Malegaon. It had a golden opportunity to score over ATS. But unfortunately it treaded the path of ATS which has a dead end. It followed the misleading footprints of a “communal” (that’s how SM Mushrif describes KP Raghuvanshi in his new book: Who Killed Karkare?) officer like KP Raghuvanshi. CBI inquiry may have been a ray of hope to some in Malegaon but it has proved to be eyewash.

The demand for CBI inquiry was not because of “public outcry” as the public prosecutor has claimed in the high court. It was a personal outcry borne with the desire to fill Muslim leadership vacuum. The lone voice filled the empty spaces in newspapers’ columns and each one of us accepted it as a gospel. It was S.M. Mushrif alone who publicly castigated and criticised this insane decision to demand a CBI inquiry on October 10, 2006 at KC College auditorium. CBI inquiry converted an easy puzzle into a complicated riddle.

The formation of Kul Jamati Tanzeem (KJT) did not help; it, in fact, made matters worse. KJT wanted to spearhead a democratic movement in order to release the accused but yet it forgot a golden-rule of democracy: to take help of secular activists. It aggressively portrayed itself as a Muslim organization which proved suicidal. It is precisely for this reason that KJT refused to cooperate and share its report with Teesta Setalvad and Justice Kolshe Patil. The inflated egos of its members must have further inflated when it submitted its so-called “report” to CBI. Is CBI a court of law? Was CBI legally bound to follow the report? Has KJT got any legal credentials that country’s premier investigating agency will follow its diktat?

CBI sleuths must have mocked at this blind and insane decision. The decision to handover the report was a collective mockery of people of Malegaon. KJT is guilty of connivance; it presented all the “evidence” to CBI the way a fresh bowl of soup is given to guests!

Centre and State government have been playing the role of hide and seek. Both are morally and politically responsible to pressurize the concerned agencies to speed up the pace of investigation. Home Minister PC Chidambaram need not become a judge to discover that justice is one of the foremost problems of Indian Muslims. He would do well to remember what American editor and reformer Frederick Douglass was fond of saying,

“I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong.”

Frederick once wrote:

“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe.”

Judges have performed their duty. Politicians have not.

Sunday Inquilab, November 22, 2009

The Seeds of Anger and Despair

The collective Muslim response to dropping of MCOCA against Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and company may have confused ordinary Indians but this response is a mirror image of decades of cries for justice. It encompasses and narrates the story of decades of bias, hate, neglect and subjugation openly practiced by communal forces and at times by the state apparatus directly. It captures the mood of a downtrodden and penniless Mussalman. There is indeed a sense of victimhood among Muslims, but too is not misplaced. Exaggeration of victimhood is a natural corollary to the events that unfolded on the night of Independence Day and continue to reoccur in various forms and manifestations till today.

There was a time when riots were a means of terror. And this terror was being implemented with a sickening regularity. In the beginning, riots were sporadic, localized and controllable but this changed in post-Nehru era. As eminent historian Mushirul Hasan writes,

“Riots at Aligarh, Kanpur, Meerut, Moradabad in UP, Hyderabad in Andhra Pradesh, Baroda and Surat in Gujarat, were bloodier, more widespread, and extended over weeks and months.”

Post-Babri and Gujarat 2002 riots are the finest example of this phenomenon. What more, this phenomenon was being helped and abetted by the State governments. As India entered into internet and 24x7 eras, it became extremely difficult to engineer riots. (Gujarat genocide of 2002 is an exception but then it has been heavily documented. It is precisely for this reason that Narendra Modi’s role is being investigated).

The Muslim answer to the riots came in the form of serial bomb blasts. Dawood Ibrahim pioneered this trend at such a time when Muslim self-esteem was below the belt. He successfully channalised Muslim despair into violence which turned to be fatal for the community in the long-run. Dawood’s one-single devilish idea has uncorked blocked arteries of Hindu fundamentalists! Bombs began to explode in Hindu as well as Muslim neighbourhood wearing the cloak of anonymity. Investigating agencies only gave a ‘Muslim’ name to this anonymity and the ‘Hindu’ remained anonymous till the Sadhvi episode. It was being implemented to redress a community’s grievance that it has been denied justice. Bomb-plotters of 1993 have been punished by India’s judicial system. Judiciary deserves a standing ovation for this feat. The culprits of 2003 twin blasts have been punished. But judiciary behaves like a toddler when it comes to punishing the rioters. A toddler cannot do anything without the help of his parents! (read executive). To an average Muslim, it is natural to ask: Is judiciary biased? Does it only favour the majority community?

The seeds of anger breed despair. And despair did begin to crawl in the Muslim mind. Despair can be a deadly weapon as senior journalist Shoma Chaudhury writes,

“When you lose faith that a system will protect and play fair by you, it breeds fatal recklessness. It makes you abdicate from the rules that cement human relations. Despair can turn you from citizen to perpetrator. From the hunted to the hunter.”

Meanwhile the trend of exploding bomb was being implemented by Hindu zealots as well. The myth that bomb blasts are only a Muslim specialty was ripped apart only in 2008 when Hemant Karkare’s ATS decided to lift the curtain from the hidden Hindu fundamentalists. Anonymity finally got another name. The long list of deadly masterminds (Safdar Nagori, Maulana Haleem, Mufti Abu Bashr, Atif Ameen etc) got another names in the form Sadhvi and Colonel Purohit. Bomb blasts of Hyderabad, Delhi, Jaipur, Bengaluru, Ahmedabad, Malegaon 2006 had only the ‘Muslim’ names. Malegaon 2008 revealed a ‘Hindu’ name for the first time although the same set of elements have been targeting mosques and other places in the Marthwada region (Parbhani, Purna, Jalna, Nanded) since 2003.

There was a full stop to a long sentence of despair.

Muslims once again regained faith in Maharashtra’s premier terror agency. The one single act of arresting Sadhvi and the company began to erase decades of mistrust. Hate, revenge, bias and injustice began to evaporate from the Muslim mind and then came the first judicial jolt which paralysed the Muslim psyche. For the first time, Indian Muslims had got an opportunity to prove their innocence. To prove that bombs-making techniques are not taught in their madrasas and homes alone. Temples and Ashrams too have been used as a terror factory. They rightly raised the issue that there was not a single blast after the arrests of Sadhvi.

The first test of sincerity of ATS will be proved in Bombay High Court or Supreme Court of India. The real test of ATS will be the conviction of all the accused of Malegaon 2008 blast; be it under MCOCA or under Indian Penal Code (IPC). If the grave charges of the ATS are to be believed, all the accused can be easily convicted under IPC. Conviction and not the legislation will be the litmus test for the ATS. And even after all this, if ATS fails to convict the accused then they will be remembered as an anti-Muslim agency like Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) of yesterday years which has slaughtered many Muslims of UP in the riots of 70s and 80s. In his book, New Wave of Violence, C.F. Rustamji quotes a senior police official as:

“I have watched with dismay during the year 1982, the conversion of the Uttar Pradesh PAC (Provincial Armed Constabulary) from the model force that I worked with in the fifties to a unit which is feted by the Hindus and hated by the Muslims in the towns of Uttar Pradesh.”

ATS can’t afford to be compared to dreaded PAC. Krish Pal Raghuvanshi can still save his team and men-in-khaki from the bad name.

The seeds of anger and despair have been planted on the soil of Malegaon. It should not turn into a volcano.

Sunday Inquilab, August 9, 2009

Justice or Just-ice?

Saffron "terror": Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur outside court (file photo)


“Doubt”, wrote M.J. Akbar, “is theoretically equidistant from right and wrong, but in real life, there is evidence, evidence creates weightage, and the weight of evidence demands judgement.” Now that stringent MCOCA has been dropped against Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and all other accused in Malegaon 2008 blast, ‘dormant’ doubt of people of Malegaon concerning ATS will get a new leash of life. And why should it not? They have an every right to be doubtful of an organisation which, perhaps, has provided little legal evidence against Sadhvi. Doubt as a consequence of rumour can be dangerous but now it has acquired judicial stamp of approval.

Doubt gives birth to many unanswered and intriguing questions: Did prosecution go soft on the accused? Was the arrest of all the accused to buy the time of minority community and hoodwink them after the general elections are over? Was the arrest meant to alter the thought-process of Muslim sub consciousness? Did the death of Hemant Karkare make space for the evaporation of “evidence”? Did KP Raghuvanshi slowly loosen his grip on the baton passed on by his predecessor? Or did he deliberately forget to implement his successful 2006 blast formula of legal entrapment? Or is he taking orders from political masters? What is the quality of evidence available with the ATS? What were the demerits of legal argument of ATS that fell flat in a court of law?

When Sadhvi and company were arrested, the men-in-Khaki behaved like trumpeters of triumph. They successfully used mainstream media to plant and leak “exclusive” stories in order to create a goody-goody image and leave an impression that they were being very ‘secular’. In a way, they left such an imprint upon people that they had the credible evidence against the accused. No other bomb blast has got so much media coverage and hype in the recent years. ATS was too busy fighting the Malegaon blast case in the media jungle rather than in a court of law. The discharge of Rakesh Dhawde from the Porna mosque blast case on Wednesday was taken lightly by the ATS. ATS officials, in fact, went on record to claim that his discharge will not affect the Malegaon blast case!

The ATS of KP Raghuvanshi must remember that their integrity and honesty is proved in a court of law. We would advise KP Raghuvanshi to follow his 2006 manual which he very “successfully” applied on 2006 Malegaon blast accused. His tactful application of MCOCA has lasted three years and its fate has been reserved in the Supreme Court.
The first major blow is judicial. KP Raghuvanshi and his men still have time to prove their assumptions in a higher court of law.

Meanwhile, a question on everybody’s lips in Malegaon is this: Is it justice or just-ice?

Justice has begun to melt like ice in public perception.

How will you deal with the public perception, Mr. Raghuvanshi?

Inquilab, August 1, 2009

Liberhan Commission, Babri Masjid: A Historical Perspective

December 6, 1992: Hindu fanatics celebrating demolition of Babri Masjid at Ayodhya

Had Zahiruddin Mohammed Badshah Ghazi, popularly known as Babar, been alive today, he would be certainly ashamed of modern India. A mosque built in his name razed by Hindu fundamentalists has become a functioning temple but yet it is termed as a “disputed structure.” Babar would have certainly argued with the present rulers that his medieval India was far better than the modern India in terms of justice. In Babar’s India, there was no such thing called as “delayed justice” or “judicial delay.” Justice Manmohan Singh Liberhan Commission of Inquiry has taken 17 long years just to ascertain events leading to the demolition of Babri Masjid. Babar would have decided the fate of the so-called “disputed structure” in 17 minutes! Politicians, judges, bureaucrats, journalists all love to use the “disputed structure” tag; it in fact gives them a legitimate right to feel ‘secular.’ Their “secularism” will pale when one compares Babar’s conception of secularism. For Babar, secularism did not mean separation of religion from the state but rather equal respect for all religions.

The secularism of Babar is hidden in a forgotten document. It could be a commandment of good governance for leaders like L.K. Advani.

Babar had drafted a secret will much before his death for his son Prince Nasiruddin Muhammad Humayun. In this will, there is a lesson for each politician father and a politician son. An extract of the will reads:

“Oh son! The Kingdom of India is full of different religions. Praised be to God that He bestowed upon you its sovereignty. It is incumbent on you to wipe all religious prejudices off the tablet of your heart, administer justice according to the ways every religion. Avoid especially the sacrifice of the cow by which you can capture the hearts of the people of India and subjects of this country may be bound up with royal obligations. Do not ruin temples and shrines of any community which is obeying the laws of Government. Administer justice in such a manner that the King be pleased with the subjects and the subjects with the King. The cause of Islam can be promoted more by the sword of obligation than by the sword of tyranny.”

(A copy of this will used to be in the possession of the late Dr. Balkrishna, Principal, Rajaram College , Kolhapur).

Can a father who abhors ruining temples and shrines of other religions build a mosque in his name after demolishing a temple?

Babri Masjid was possibly built by a courtesan Mir Baqi on the instructions of Babar in the 1528 at Ayodhya. There is historical evidence in the form of inscriptions inside the mosque to support the assumption that it was constructed on the order of Babar. Also there is nothing in history that suggests that Babar ever visited Ayodhya. A complete and close reading of Babarnama shows that Babar was encamped north of Aud on March 28 1528. According to one historian Babar was encamped at the junction of the rivers Sirda and Gagra. On April 2, Babar went out to hunt in the area north of the camp. Babar must have left the encampment, as he records on March 28, 1528 that he had asked to find ways to cross the river. We are forced to doubt if Babar ever went to Ayodhya. So the question of demolishing a temple at Ayodhya does not arise.

So with Liberhan Commission, Indian Muslims have been awarded with one more inquiry report. Will it suffer the fate of Sri Krishna Commission report? Going by the history of promise and subsequent betrayals by the government, the four-volume report will gather dust in the dustbin of history. First government needs to clear speck of dust from earlier inquiry commissions and reports concerning Indian Muslims. Successive Congress governments have been extremely good in documenting Muslim issues but the true intent of any government is measured by the pace of implementation. Congress will once again show Indian Muslims bubbles of hope but alas bubbles don’t last a lifetime. For last 60 years, Indian Muslims have been appeased with bubbles.

The role of the judiciary in Babri Masjid episode has come under sharp criticism. Strangely enough, Pakistan has done better than India on this front. The story of
Lahore’s Shahidganj Masjid is Ayodhya in reverse. All the elements of Ayodhya case were present. A mosque in adverse possession of Sikhs was demolished. Muslims agitated and there was involvement of religious figures. Muslims were frustrated by the court decision. It upheld that the title of ownership was no longer in Muslim hands and therefore Sikhs were entitled to whatever they liked to do with the structure. Muslims decided to move in the Punjab Assembly to enact legislation for the takeover of the site. They all failed. But the situation was not reversed even after the establishment of Pakistan. To this day, when there is hardly anyone to visit it, the Gurdwara Shahidganj stands in Lahore as it did before August 15 1947.

In Babri Masjid case, the ownership of the land was in Muslim hands. It is a wakf property and according to section 51 of Wakf Act 1995, wakf property cannot be transferred to ‘Nyas’ (Shri Ramjanambhumi Nyas) for Ram temple construction.

In the Shahidganj case the judiciary acted impartially and speedily. In the Ayodhya case, Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer had angrily remarked: “The judiciary will be described as villain of the piece.”

According to Ms. Anju Gupta, the then superintendent of the police, Faizabad, Police had foreknowledge of the Babri Masjid demolition. Deposing before the Liberhan Commission in May 1994, she told that on December 5, 1992, the then inspector general of police, Faizabad zone, had warned officers of his department that there was clear indication from intelligence agencies that the disputed shrine would be attacked on December 6. She had told the commission that L.K. Advani expressed his desire to go to the area to stop the Kar Sevaks but she was discouraged by SP of Intelligence, PAC (Provincial Armed Constabulary). Ms. Gupta told the commission that Advani had in her presence said that temple would be constructed at the very spot and the same was repeated by Murli Manohar Joshi, accepting that they were pleased with the actions of Kar Sevaks. The Bajrang Dal leader, Vinay Katiyar, had mocked Mulayam Singh Yadav by saying over the public speaking system ‘Yahan parinda par nahi maar sakta.’

Will Manmohan Singh speak with clarity of thought over Ayodhya issue? One is reminded of what Jyoti Basu had said on December 9, 1992 regarding the makeshift construction by kar sevaks. “It is an illegal construction and government has every right to demolish it.” When he was asked about the possible Hindu backlash, Basu was honest and blunt, “Let there be repercussions from the Hindu fundamentalists. My party will support any government willing to bring down the structure erected by demolishing the shrine.”

Men like Basu are becoming a rare breed in Indian politics.

Can Prime Minister Manmohan Singh do a Jyoti Basu in 2009?

Sunday Inquilab, July 5, 2009