FACTS againest MYTHS FEBRUARY-MARCH-2005
Item
- Title
- FACTS againest MYTHS FEBRUARY-MARCH-2005
- extracted text
-
VIKAS ADHYAYAN KENDRA
FEBRUARY • MARCH 2005
INFORMATION BULLETIN
Engineering Riots or Spontaneous Outbursts?
The Myths behind the Godhra Riots
.COMMENT
he Gujarat riots of 2002 has since not only led to a prodigious amount of data but also evidence on how
minorities were subjected to massive rounds of brutalities bringing in its wake bloodshed, arson,
looting, aqd rape; how. law enforcement agencies of the Modi Government played to the tunes of most
rabid communal outfits like the Sangh Parivar. This, plus the apathy to the violence itself served as an
aid to these groups to exhort people to "save our country by boycotting Muslims economically and
socially". Gujarat’s print media too raised their anti-Muslim pitch during the riots and even thereafter
and still continues to do so'. The local press carried banner headlines: “hundreds of Muslim terrorists"
being apprehended daily. The targeting of Muslims is a conscious strategy to.terrorise the community
with sexual violence as an essential weapon in their arsenal.
T
The riots also reflects how the Gujarat police dealt with riot cases as affecting the Muslim community
i.e. out of4252 cases filed during the post-Godhra communal violence, 2120 were closed. The Supreme
Court, however, intervened and ordered the police of the Modi Government to review such cases. The
State apparatus responded by pursuing what is now commonly known as ‘Accused Protection
Programme’. Large scale granting of bails and acquittals led to sub-standard investigations and farcical
conduct of the trials. Most of the accused in the post riot cases were released on bail within one year
whereas only 1 of the 75 accused in the Godhra case was not. The draconian law, POTA, became a
weapon in the hands of the Modi government in targeting the Muslim community. Muslim youth were
detained and third degree torture inflicted upon them to extract confessions. (Cf. also Box on page 2)
Leaders of the VHP, Bajrang Dal, etc, were depicted as targets of these ‘terrorists’ thereby making
them heroes among the Hindu community who then become apprehensive of the Muslim community in
general.
The law and order apparatus during the riots clearly
failed to fulfil its constitutional responsibility. The
harrowing narration of the barbarism also failed to
influence the judges of not only the Session Courts
but also of the High Court of Gujarat. Yet, these judges
did not fail to unhesitatingly condemn the National
Human Rights Commission! Moreover, it later even
confronted the Election Commission, challenging its
powers of when to hold the State Elections. Further,
public prosecutors also failed to help the victims. On
April 12,2004, however, the BEST Bakery Judgement
was pronounced, again, by the intervention of the
Supreme Court when the Gujarat High Court upheld
the Session Court's decision to acquit the accused.
FACTS against MYTHS — February^March 2005
FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY
The Supreme Court ordered for a re-trial and the case
transferred from Gujarat to Mumbai, thus indirectly
damming the judicial system of Gujarat as prejudiced
and ineffective. Fresh public prosecutors were also
appointed in consultation with the victims.
On the other side, the BJP and its leadership during
the riots generated a bogey that the whole Godhra
incident was a well-planned conspiracy. Accordingly
a warped theory on riots was manufactured which is
nothing but a political ploy to serve as a camouflage
forthe genocidal violence that was unleashed almost
immediately following the Godhra riots. The formulation
is an important feature in the construct of a communal
theory of riots also as part of a campaign to control
the numbers of ‘backward’ minorities, it stressing the
communal divide in mixed areas. In so doing it fuels
riots that lead to the exodus of specific communities
from specific localities and States which succeeds in
ghettoizing the community. With such a construct on
riots, is it any wonder that from Day 1, neither the
police nor the railways in Gujarat paid any attention in
investigating the case comprehensively given the
gravity of the tragedy?! Depositions of passengers and
witnesses were not collected systematically; the post
mortem of the victims was not conducted carefully
and the site of the tragedy not quarantined. Forensic
samples were not lifted in a timely or schematically
rational manner; some forensic material were even
discarded!
The Government sought to generalise the problem of
riots out of existence in the name of peace. Legal
governance also sought to individuate the problem out
of existence when the Courts’ insisted on rigorous
proof of individual complicity. It is precisely this kind
of deliberately manipulated ambiguity that Modi, the
Togadias, and others escape both moral and legal
blame arising out of their direct or indirect involvement
in riots. As a result, there is a general pervasive attitude
on the part of governance that riots are simply
unfortunate events; that sooner such events are
forgotten the better. After all the need of the hour is to
heal wounds and make peace in communities rather
than rake up issues that re-open wounds.
The general approach, therefore, towards a riot is not
to deal with either; the problems that give rise to it or
the atrocities that .are committed during riots.
Consistent in this “riots-are-best-forgotten” approach,
many stratagems of governance1 are manufactured.
The first is to assuage people’s feelings by quickly
appointing a Commission of Inquiry. A Supreme Court
or High Court judge is appointed who, over several
years, goes through the evidence. When the Report
is finally tabled after it has conquered all the procedural
hurdles placed in the way of its production, the report
ends up finally as a dead letter! If recommendations
are made for prosecuting particular individuals - as in
the case of the Justice Srikrishna Report- it is greeted
with political annoyance. Sometimes - as in the case
of the Wadhwa Report-the judge shows unenviable
restraint in refusing to make political indictments in
ways that have been rightly described as
unsatisfactory.
The policy of ‘riots are-best-forgotten' approach is iiW
no way a policy of good governance. It is merely one
of political expediency, calculated to get the problem
out of the way until it recurs again; and, then, get rid
of it once more. There is no egalitarian dignity in this.
Instead, it is surrender to dominant communal politics
to leave behind the shocking message that Indian
governance will not pursue communal injustice in the
name of communal harmony of peace. This is not
because the peace in our country would be put in peril,
but because it is more convenient (even expedient) to
swallow the injustice, eclipse its existence and gain
political dividends fordoing so.
This evasive approach is not to be confused with the
policy for ‘truth and reconciliation’, which Nelson
Mandela used with some embarrassing success in
South Africa. The ‘truth’ commission, however, was a
forum for people to admit their guilt as acts of contrition.
In India, the transgressors admit no such guilt! Nor d<A
they make any symbolic act of contrition as part
r“ — — — — —— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ——————— — — — — — n
I
I
I
I
Godhra Accused & Torture2
•
Ina highly controversial move, at least 7 persons accused in the Dodhra violence were subjected to
intense interrogation after being given doses of sodium pentothal, better known as 'Truth Serum’, a
drug which lowers inhibition and makes people more communicative. The 7, including prime accused
M.H. Kolota and Haji Bilal Ismail Sujela who are facing charges of murder, rioting and arson, were
subjected to the treatment for 3 days at the Sir Sayaji General Hospital in Baroda in the first week of
July2002. Oneoftheaccused,AnwarM.Mada,wasreportedlysufferingfromthedrug ’ssideeffects.
Such tests are illegal and violation of the basic rights granted under the Constitution. While Art.20 is
clearly against forcing someone, even if accused of committing a crime, to be a witness against
I
himself. Art.21 grants protection to an individual from any inhuman or degrading treatment. Besides,
truth serum tests are banned under international laws to which India is also signatory. In 1999, the UN
|
|
|
|
■
I
I
|
.
!
[
■
I
I
I
L_——————————————————————————————————J
I
|
had dubbed the use of the truth serum as a form of torture as it meant physical and psychological
abuse to extract information.
FACTS against MYTHS — February-March 2005
2
reconciliation. Nor is any remorse expressed at all on
the pogrom. The violence is, instead, justified and even
glorified!
The Gujarat pogrom of 2002 has since become a
synonym for blood curdling images of charred bodies
of largely Muslim men, women and children. Major
findings of various independent citizens' groups brought
out the enormity of the barbarism. Almost every
independent body - the International Initiative for
Justice in Gujarat, the National Human Rights
Commission (NHRC), Minorities Commission, Election
Commission and number of fact-finding teams and
committees - PUDR, PUCL, AIDWA, SAHMAT, etc.,
— concluded that either the State police was aiding
the rioters or itself participating in it. Ex-President
K.R. Narayanan confirmed, to the Nanavati-Shah
Commission, belatedly though, of having talked about
a definite “conspiracy” between the Centre and the
State governments in perpetuating the riots in Gjujarat.
In his letter to the Commission on April 8,2005 the
President indicted the Vajpayee government for
^paction. The former Gujarat bureaucrat, Sunder Singh
^^handari, during the riots, recently accused Modi of
taking the riots lightly and the demand that Modi be
removed from office.
Riots, however, cannot and must not be erased from
memory. Riots are a reminder of much that is rotten in
our society. Above all, they represent potent political
statements by those who make political capital of
them.’ The State on its part formally pretends to
neutrality, asking people to accept riots as an
unfortunate aberration and as such should be best
forgotten. This act of ‘soft pedalling’ the issue of riots
only plays into the hands of the communalists ‘hard
pedalling’ their insidious and evil designs. For those
who seek to derive social and political gain from a
communal riot portray ‘rioters’ as heroes rather than
murderous criminals who acted for and advance the
communal cause. Hence, it is imperative that instead
^pf examining riots as mere aberrations to be eventually
Obrased from memory - without justice to the victims
and prosecuting the culprits — riots must be dealt
head-on, not kept hanging in the air or eventually swept
under the carpet or pigeon-holed.
MYTH: The Godhra riots like any riots are
undoubtedly diabolic incidents that emerge at the
spur of the moment, spontaneously, and therefore
it is impossible to lay blame on any person or
body.
FACT: This understanding of riots is both dishonest
and irresponsible.1
What, then, is a riot? Is it an explosion of events,
which simply occurred for which no one is responsible?
Or, does it congeal a series of incidents and events
which when broken up into their individual sequences
reveal barbaric acts by individuals and groups who have
mercilessly chosen to inflict acts of cruelty on innocent
fellow beings and everything around them through pre-
For those who don't understand Gujarati, it means,
"What is today's pogrom?”
mediated acts which it would be irresponsible to say
that they are not responsible. A riot is carnage. A
ghastly form of violence by people who know what
they were doing whilst pursuing their own social and
political agendas. Riots are not effusive explosions
that simply happen for which no one is to blame. Riots
are not crimes of passion. Broken down frame by
frame they aggregate as a series of gruesome murders,
arson, rapes beatings and killings. Picasso’s
Guernica reminds the world to fracture our perceptions
of what appears to be an impressionist blur to see a
riot as a series of chilling criminal acts committed by
callous people for cruel ends to viciously inflict torture
‘and pain on the innocent. In this conception, a riot is
a series of events for which people are cu Ipable.
In this context we are reminded of the well-known
saying 'let a sleeping dog lie", understood as an
acquiescent mindset. Politicians conveniently used
in interpreting violence like communal riots as events
that should not be deeply probed into, lest “old wounds"
get needlessly reopened. Such a notion was
conveniently used it to jettison the Sri Krishna
Commission, probing the Mumbai communal riots in
1996! The guilty were thus let off! The Commission
was however reviewed by Atal Behari Vajpayee on the
final day of his 13lh-day government in 1996. He did
this not so much because he disapproved of the
communal argument but because he was wooing the
secular camp at the time by placing the contentious
points on the BJP’s Hindutva agenda on the back
burner1. Thus, in essence, what the communal lobby
failed to achieve in Mumbai by closing down the Sri
Krishna inquiry, it tried to enforce in Gujarat by shutting
FACTS against MYTHS —- February-March 2005
3
down the police cases and influencing the witnesses
— exploiting their emotions i.e. their desires to bury
the past and return to a life free of fear and tension - playing upon their “desire" of 'Letting bygones be
bygones’.
himself who helped spread the rumour that the
passengers could not alight from the S6 coach
because the doors of the said coach was closed
from outside! The paragraph 1.10 of the DRM’s
report contained the shocking assertion:
Communal riots like the Godhra riots are largely pre
planned events. A member of the National Human
Rights Commission (NHRC) headed by its
Chairperson, Justice J.S. Verma, pointed out the
horrific fact of “the communal riot (having) been planned
weeks in advance.. .and Godhra was the occasion and
not the cause”. According to him, the Commission
has information that the VHP had sourced voters’ lists
and documents from the Registrar of Companies to
identify Muslims as also establishments in which
members of the minority community held more then
50 per cent of equity. Similarly, some government
sources3 stated that VHP members drew up lists of
even government departments (e.g. the Food
Corporation of India) and their allied agencies, and
identified ’undesirables’ and their addresses.
(Incidentally, this strategy had been adopted during
the 1992 riots in a Mumbai area of Pratiksha Nagar).
“The riots on this scale could not have been planned
in a day. It would have taken weeks. What followed
was systematic and pinpointed targeting", Justice
Verma noted.
“1.10: A majority of the passengers of the S-6
coach were unable to alight from the burning
coach, primarily due to sever pelting ofstones on
both side by the mob as well as locking of the
exit door from outside."
That a top executive of the western railway can
resort to such falsehood to help spread the rumour
that the kar sevaks were burnt to death by locking
the doors from outside is indeed shocking and
criminal. It is not only of common knowledge that
the doors of any railway compartment cannot be
locked by any private person from outside but it is. ■
also the finding of the Forensic Science Laboratory
that three doors of S-6 were actually open while
the coach was burning! The vernacular press
spread this rumour all over Gujarat to instigate
the Hindus against the Muslims during the^)
aftermath of the Godhra incident, which led to the
infamous theory of “reaction”.
3.
MYTH: The S/6 Coach of the Sabarmati Express
that was set ablaze was a preplanned “terrorists”
attack by Muslims of Godhra to burn alive the kar
sevaks in the train.
FACT: The Justice U.C. Bannerjee interim report has
debunked this claim. Its findings have shot holes in
this and other such claims. A brief summary4 itself will
throw light on the whole issue:
1.
2.
That the Railways did not conduct any inquiry into
the Godhra incident though it was the statutory
obligation on the part of the Commissioner of
Railway Safety to make an inquiry as soon as
possible. Significantly, the Commissioner of
Railway Safety, Western Circle, Mumbai informed
the Railway administration by a letter dated
30.10.2002 that it was thought prudent not to
conduct the inquiry since the State Government
had ordered an inquiry underthe Commissions of
Inquiry Act. It was noted that inquiry under the
Commissions of Inquiry Act was ordered on 6“' of
March, 2002 i.e. after 8 days of the incident
whereas the Commissioner of Railway Safety
ought to have conducted the enquiry within 48
hours to collect the evidences immediately. Justice
Banerjee therefore held that Railway’s failure to
take steps against the errant official is an act of
great indiscretion to the say the least.
That the report of Shri B.B.Mogdgil, former
Divisional Railway Manager (D R M) of Vadodara
dated 28.2.2002 clearly exposed the collusion of
certain highly placed railway officials like the DRM
That the S-7 coach which was adjacent to the illfated S-6 coach was partially damaged but
mysteriously, not detached from the train at
Godhra along with the S-6 and S-5 coaches. Later
on, in the “Conspiracy Theory" the S-7 coach was
brought into prime focus when it was alleged that
the “Muslim conspirators had entered the S-6
coach by a cut they had allegedly made in the
canvas covering of the vestibule of the S-7 coach
and therefore poured 60 litres of petrol inside S6." An obvious question would beta know whether
the canvas was examined for find ing out the alleged
“cut” made therein! Justice Banerjee’s report has
brought out yet another shocking revelation in this
regard. He had discovered that the said piece of
canvas was sold as scrap. This proof is now lost.
forever! The Gujarat police story thus is woven" y
around a non-existent piece of evidence!
Additionally, on the so-called Conspiracy Theory.5 It
also has several loopholes. These are: How did the
conspirators know that there were kar servaks on the
Sabarmati Express? The train was also running over
4 hours late! And as for kar sevaks they were
scheduled to return a day earlier but were delayed by
a day. How could then the conspirators know that
they were on the Sabarmati Express? Even if they
did, delay of over 4 hours could have upset their plan.
In such matters even minutes count, let alone hours.
Finally, after examining several witnesses and
voluminous documentary evidence, the Banerjee report
concludes that on the basis of the evidence presently
available, the “Petrol theory" or even the “miscreant
theory” is totally absurd. The fire in the S-6 coach
was essentially an accidental fire.
FACTS against MYTHS — February-March 2005
4
MYTH: The culprits responsible for the Gujarat
riots were immediately apprehended, booked
and the riots brought under control within 72
hours
was transferred and then went on deputation to CBI.
When the UPA Government came to power, he was
removed. Today the State government has promoted
him as DG and considered very close to Modi.
FACT: On the contrary! This claim failed to square
with the NHRC Chairperson’s assessment of the
situation. The Chairperson Justice Verma, on his return
from Gujarat, hit out at the Modi Government for its
failure to restore normalcy, even 3 weeks after the riots
broke out!6 Justice Verma had also rejected the
preliminary report and sought a more credible
explanation. He also sought an assurance from Modi
who had called upon him at the time that given the allround tension, school examinations would be
postponed, and the VHP’s threatened “asthi (ashes
and bones of Godhra victims) yatras” to 750 different
places nationwide, would not take place!
G. Subha Rao: He was the State Chief Secretary.
Toed the Modi line during the carnage. On his
retirement, he became the chairperson of the
Electricity Appellate Authority.
Bhagyesh Jha: He has been Vadodara Collector for
almost 4 years and set to become the longest serving
collector of the district. (Generally, collectors and
DDOs are transferred after 3 years)
Ashok Narayan: He was Additional Chief Secretary,
Home. On retirement, he was posted as State Vigilance
Commissioner.
Rakesh Asthana: He was posted as IG, CID and
heads the SIT constituted to probe the Godhra carnage.
Recognising the “service” rendered in establishing the
conspiracy angle behind the incident, he was
transferred as IG, Vadodara range. He continues to
head the SIT probe. After the Bannerjee Committee
submitted its interim report debunking the conspiracy
theory, the Modi government asked him to brief the
press about how a conspiracy theory was hatched by
Muslim fundamentalists to kill 'kar sevaks’. (Cont. on
pg- 8)
During the communal riots the Gujarat Government
took vindictive action against officers who had done
their duty as they were duty-bound to and no action
against those who failed to carry out their
jfesponsibilities in checking criminal acts. This has
oeen done despite clear-cut norms set by the National
Human Rights Commission.
Riots-Rewards...
On February 23,2005 the Gujarat Government issued
an order7 promoting 3 or 4 Additional DIG's to the DG
rank. It also gave the assurance that compliant officers
were promoted. These officers were:
M.K.Tandon: He was joint corhmissioner of Police,
Ahmedabad, Sector II. The Gulbarga Society and
Narodya Patiya were under his jurisdiction. He was
shifted as IG, Surat Range.
P.C. Pande: He was Commissioner of Police,
Ahmedabad, where some 500 people were killed. He
Gujarat Communal Riots: Status Report8
C ity / D is trie t
Total
cases
registered
Pending
Trial
closed
True
cases
closed
False
cases
Acquitted
Pending
Investigation
Pending
Sanction for
Prosecution
Other
Ahmedabad city
959
516
358
58
7
19
-
1
r^Ahmedabad Rural
88
69
16
-
2
1
1
-
3
10
1
-
-
Baroda city
617
398
204
-
1
Baroda Rural
242
93
148
-
1
Anand
199
134
62
3
-
-
-
-
Kheda
193
134
38
3
17
4
-
Panchmahal
179
96
62
1
16
4
-
-
4
-
-
-
T
4
-
-
-
3
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
2
-
2
1:
19
6
Bhavnagar
310
42
264
Sabarkantha
467
176
281
Banaskantha
61
15
45
Mehsana
172
78
90
Dahod
87
24
60
-
-
2
6
76
36
Others
678
262
404
Total
4252
2037
2032
4
FACTS against MYTHS — February-March 2005
46
5
Gujarat Pogrom As Genocide?8
Under international law. offences such as genocide and crime against humanity are committed not only
against persons or communities targeted; they are also, ‘erga omnes’ violations, that is, violations of obligations
that are owed to every nation, and thereby, to humanity as a whole. Genocide and crimes against humanity
are also non-derivable violations (*jus cogens') that can never be justified. As such these crimes are subject
to universal jurisdiction, which triggers the authority, and, indeed, the obligation of the international commuity
as a whole, and every nation individually, to extradite or prosecute the perpetrators. For the reasons
(•feminist analysis...) the pogrom against the Muslim community of Gujarat and the on-going persecution
constitute both a genocide attack and a crime against humanity.
Under international law, "crimes against humanity" and genocide are equally grave violations. There is no
hierarchy of egregiousness between them. In assessing whether the attack on the Muslim population of
Gujarat constitutes either crimes against humanity or genocide the available facts on close examination8 in
the light of the international understanding of each of these crimes and their distinct elements. Accordingly,
on the basis of the criteria laid down the attack on the Muslim community'prima facid meet the legal criteria
of both genocide and crimes against humanity. Both crimes give rise to Universal jurisdiction to try the
perpetrators and obligate the Indian State to repair the damage and prevent reoccurrence.
The contemporary understanding of both genocide and crimes against humanity has also been shaped and
developed through the jurisprudence of the post-World War II Tribunals and, more recently, in the ad hoc
International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Sources for this conception has also been
drawn upon the Genocide Convention and the Rome Satatue as well as upon Tribunals’ jurisprudence and
other sources of international law.
Are the Gujarat Riots of February-March 2002 Genocide?
Over the years, immense caution has been exercised in the application of the term “Genocide”. Since
genocides are often State-sanctioned mass violence against a particular group or collectively within its
territorial borders, acknowledgement that a certain situation is genocide at once holds the State or authority
under which it occurs, responsible. It places an obligation on the State that acknowledges the genocide, to
take all measure to prevent and prosecute those responsible. The reluctance by Sate in the international
arena to acknowledge genocides may thus be motivated by the desire to avoid "telling on other States”; to
protect their economic or other interests with the genocidal State and excape any obligation to take action. It
is, however, articulated in objective terms like, whether the death and physical harm has been significant,
whether the two sides are equally responsible or not, whether the “genocide" is a manifestation of internal
political equations or not and other similar arguments that are generally put forward by the genocidal State.
The conclusion that was arrived on this question was based on examining some of the above issues and
others such as the need to adequately describe the continuing violence, the hierarchy of harms compared to
situations elsewhere in the world and the psychological significance of the use of the term "genocide". The
conclusion that there was an on-going genocidal project in Gujarat and the events of February-March 2002
in fact satisfy the legal definition of the crime of genocide.
>
Legal Definition of Genocide
>
The Genocide Convention, completed in 1948, defines the crime of genocide in Art.2:
>
Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national,
ethical, racial or religious group, as such:
>
Killing members of the group;
>
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
>
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction whole
or in part;
>
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
>
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
If anyone or more of the above acts are committed with the intent to destroy a group identifiable as a distinct
nation, ethnic, racial or religious group, it is Genocide.
There are many testimonies presented to the international panel on Gujarat and other tribunals from which
it is clear that 4 of the 5 acts mentioned above have been committed.
FACTS against MYTHS — February-March 2005
6
Major Riot Cases8
1
INCIDENT
KILLINGS
STATUS
ENarodla Patia, Ahmedabad
83
Trial yet to begin. Some accused absconding. Two still in jail, twog
witnesses were also jailed.
3
INaroda Gaon, politicians
12
Trial yet to begin. Witnesses who named were jailed in connection 1
■ Ahmedabad
with a murder case.
cChamanpura, Ahmedabad
67
Witnesses asking for their statements to be recorded properly and J
for a thorough investigation.
1
ISardarpura, Mehasana
33
Witnesses asking for special public prosecutor. The present!
District public prosecutor is a VHP leader.
[Randhikpur, Dahod
18
Case closed as true but undetected (owing to lack of evidence). J
Main witness named the accused. But police have not arrested 1
them; instead the police have declared the witness "unstable". * j
iPandharwada, Panchmahal
21
Accused acquitted.
f Khanpur, Panchmahal
73
All the accused acquitted. During the trial, the witnesses identified j
the culprits. They said that they did not name these accused to the 5
police and that the real accused were different people. The J
witnesses named the real accused in the court. But the public!
1
prosecutor did not make an application to bring the real accused I
before the court. The court while acquitting the accused had |
passed some observations against the police for not investigating 3
the case properly.
1
■ Anjenwa, Panchmahal
20 absconding. 5 accused not named in the charge sheet.J
11
Witnesses have asked for the arrest of the accused or their!
property to be attached as was done against the absconding in J
the Godhra case.
! Ambika Society, Panchmahal
13
I
FIR clubbed with three other cases that occurred in three separate J
place: Kalol, Boru and Vajalpur. Trial has not yet begun.
■ Eral, Panchmahal
9
The witness is a woman whose daughter was raped and killed.|
She has asked for the 'absconding' to be arrested and for the 3
names to be included in the charge sheet. The judge will not!
proceed until all 32 witnesses are present at the same time ini
court.
-(Details of Losses
7
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
> Rs.38, 000 million estimated losses suffered by the Muslim community.
Rs.30, 000 million estimated to have been lost due to closing down of shops, industries and commerce.
> The
Gujarat Chamber of Commerce puts the figure as Rs.20, 000 million.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
1150 hotels were burnt in Ahmedabad alone.
Rs.6000 million loss was suffered by the hotel industry.
Rs.5000 million worth of property was lost due to hotels and restaurants being burnt down in Bhavnagar,
Ahmedabad. etc.
20,000 workers from the hotel industry were rendered jobless
Over 1,000 trucks are estimated to have been burnt.
Transport companies lost business amounting to Rs. 700 million.
Rs. 10,000 million were lost in damage to textile mills in Surat alone.
55 Mosques and Dargahs were destroyed in Ahmedabad city and district alone. 180-200 Mosques and
Dargahs destroyed in other places.
20,000 two-wheelers and 4,000 cars were burnt. Insurance claims worth Rs. 80,000 million were lodged
by owners of two and four wheelers.
90% of commercial establishments have wiped out on national highway no 8.
L — —————————————————————————————
FACTS against MYTHS — February-March 2005
|
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
leaders of Bharuch leading to his transferred
to an Adivasi district, in Narmada.
A.K. S ha ram a ; He was SP, Mehsana, where the
Sardarpura incident occurred. 31 people were burnet
alive there! Now he is IG, Gandhinagar range.
P. K. Mishra: He was Modi’s Principal Secretary.
Presently, he is with the Union Home Ministry as
additional secretary.
>
P.B. Godhia, DCP of Ahmedabad
>
Himanshu Bhatta: SP of Banskantha,
Palanpur. During the riots, he witnessed a
sub-inspector leading a Hindu mob. He
initiated an inquiry against the sub-inspector
and got him suspended. The sub-inspector,
however, returned to the same post and Bhatt
was transferred as SP Intelligence. Presently,
he is on a study trip abroad.
K. Nityanandan: He was Secretary, Home. Recently,
transferred as Commissioner of Rajkot by upgrading
the post
v,„
...Punishment
In contrast to such “rewards” only a few government
officers in Gujarat, on principle, did not follow the clear
cut but illegal instructions by the State Government
to let rioters to kill members of the minority community
with impunity. All four of these exemplary
administrators were then transferred (Arora, V., Indian
Express, October 28,2004) these officers are:
>
Vivek Srivasta, SP, Kutch: He was
transferred overnight after he arrested a VHP
leader. Now he on deputation in Delhi.
>
Rahul Sharma SP, Bhavnagar: He saved
200 Muslim children who were in a ‘madrasa’
surrounded by Hindu mobs. He visited the
site and ordered firing in which 3 Hindus died.
The same evening he was transferred as SCP,
Control Room, and Ahmedabad. He had
discovered serious flaws in the Naroda Patiya
and Gulbarga Society investigations. He was
given an inconsequental posting in Surat.
Presently, he is on deputation to CBI.
>
Sathish Sharma: Hewas DIG, Ahmedabad.
After dealing strictly with VHP activists, he
was stripped of the post. Right now, he is
posted with the anti-corruption bureau.
>
M.D. Antani: He was an SP, Bharuch, a
sensitive area but did not allow any major
communal flareup. He arrested some VHP
GMO
Clearly, the Sabarmati Express incident is notan open
and shut case of Muslims targeting KarSevaks. Had
it been so the police would not have been so tight
lipped.9
References:
1.
Kumar A., (ed.) MODPtied Justice and Rule of Law.
The Case of Best Bakery. Udbhavana Publication,
Delhi, 2004
2. Godhra Massacre, How Did Bogie S-6 Catch Fir^
The Week, July 7, 2002
W
3. Bhushan R, "Thy Hand, Great Anarch" Outlo'ok, March
18, 2002
4. Unraveling the Truth; Interim Report of the J. Banerjee
Committee into the Fire in the Sabarmati Express at
Godhra, Combat Law, Mumbai, (Suppliment) 2005
5. Engineer, A.A. Godhra Training Burning Incident &
Banerjee Report, Centre for Study of Society and
Secularism, February 2005, Mumbai
6. ' Krishnan M. & Pillai A,'’"Crime and Management",
Outlook, April 8, 2002
7. Gujarat Cover-Up, Tehelka, March 12,2005
8. Threatened Existence: A Feminist Analysis of the
Genocide in Gujarat, International Initiative for Justice
in Gujarat, Bombay, 2003
9. Parshuram K., "The Man Who Knows Too Much",
Outlook, April 1, 2002
10. Varadarajan, S. The Truth about Godhra, The Hindu,
January 23,2005
11. State Sponsored Genocide: Factsheet Gujarat 2002,
Official Reports, CPI (M) Publication, New Delhi. 2002
12. Punwani, J. Dateline Godhra, Nirbhay Bano Andolan,
Mumbai, 2002
GMO
G8SO
Graphics on page 1 and 3 are from Morparia, H. & Kulkarni, A. Never Again! Cartoons on the Gujarat Carnage,
YUVA/FOCUS India Programme, Mumbai, 2002.
1
r
[|
Facts against Myths is a bi-monthly bulletin of factual information on a number of development myths and
fallacies, etc, including information against alien development models, paradigms and false concepts on caste,
creed and gender.
ProducedandPublishedby:
Vikas Adhyayan Kendra, D-1 Shivdham, 62 Link Road, Malad (W), Mumbai 400 064, INDIA
3 2882 2850 & 2889 8662 Fax: 2889 8941
Email: vak@bom3.vsnl.net.in
Website: www.vakindia.org
I
I
Design & Layout: Kartiki Desai
Printed by: Omega Publications
j
i
2 $ 3 Emerald Comer, Maratha Colony, Tilakwadi,
Belgaum 590 006 @ 094481-441^4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Position: 4374 (2 views)