Wednesday, April 17, 2013

The NAMO STORY- (here is the PLAIN TRUTH!)





The Namo Story A Political Life
THE NAMO STORY A POLITICAL LIFE
BY
KINGSHUK NAG

PUBLISHED BY ROLI BOOKS | PAGES: 188 | RS. 295
A lot of the myths around Modi and his economic prowess are based on half
truths and gross exaggerations. Modi’s hyped Vibrant Gujarat shows, for instance, convey the impression that Gujarat leads other states in attracting foreign investment. But the truth is that Gujarat has received only 5 per cent of foreign investments in India in the last 12 years. Maharashtra and the National Capital Region of New Delhi are far ahead.
Nowadays and more often than not, the website of the Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation (GSPC) does not open easily. It is as though the bosses of GSPC do not want information about the company to be public. But this was not always the case. On a Sunday at the end of June 2005, during torrential monsoon rain over the city of Ahmedabad, Narendra Modi suddenly called for an evening press conference. Rudely awakened from their post-lunch siesta, mediapersons tore to the Sardar Patel Institute of Public Administration to figure out what the matter was. Modi was at his ebullient best: “I am proud to announce the biggest gas find in India. We have discovered more than 20 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of gas. GSPC has discovered this gas which is valued upwards of $50 billion,” Modi said. The gas had been struck at the distant Krishna-Godavari Basin off the coast of Andhra Pradesh, where GSPC had taken up exploration. Modi’s officials were quick to point out that the discovery made by GSPC was higher than the 14 tcf discovered by Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) in the same basin.
The hype created by GSPC soon emboldened Modi to egg the state government-owned company to go international. GSPC took up blocks in Egypt, Australia, Yemen and Indonesia. Earlier, Modi had signed an MoU with Russia’s Astrakhan province for the same purpose.
Less than eight years later, the GSPC bubble burst. After some false indicators, the discovery proved to be nothing but a mirage. The Directorate-General of Hydrocarbons, which independently evaluates such ‘discoveries’, had figured out that the find was not worth 20 tcf but only about 2 tcf. GSPC managers realised that even this 2 tcf would be difficult to extract because the costs would be very high. According to a senior official, Modi was informed about all this two years ago. He heard the matter out and said nothing more. Obviously, no public announcements were made, but GSPC had reputedly borrowed upwards of Rs 9,000 crore to fund the exploration that has, so far, yielded little. At the fag-end of the campaign for Election 2012, Arvind Kejriwal had also brandished documents to show that GSPC had entered into a partnership with a company based in Barbados and had thrown away its stakes for a pittance. This has apparently rattled Modi who has built his image on probity.
Modi may not have berated his officials. But to cover up all this and in a bid to be seen as a successful venture, GSPC has spawned several subsidiaries in related businesses like gas transmission, gas purchase and sale and even supply of gas to domestic households. In the first week of October 2012, it bought 65 per cent of the equity in Gujarat Gas Company, an entity owned, till then, by British Gas, an MNC. If newspaper reports are to be believed, there was an element of coercion in the takeover: by raising the prices of supplies, Gujarat Gas, which supplies domestic gas in Ahmedabad, was locked in a dispute with the Gujarat government.
Later, British Gas put up Gujarat Gas for sale. Media reports allege that Adani Gas and Torrent Power, two private companies interested in the purchase, were advised to keep away. In the end, GSPC took over Gujarat Gas at a cost of Rs 2,694 crore that was a heavy discount from the market price of Rs 4,000 crore British Gas was expecting. Barely three weeks later, on October 21, Britain’s high commissioner in India, John Bevan, called on Modi, ending 10 years of boycott of the Gujarat chief minister. Her Majesty’s government announ­ced that the engagement was to further British business interests in Gujarat. Thus, Modi was able to achieve twin objectives: provide for a profitable revenue stream for the down-in-the-dumps GSPC, and rein in the British, whose attitude had been troubling him for long.
Riots and After
It was as if the entire Gujarati society held the community of Gujarati Muslims responsible for the Godhra train incident, even though it had taken place far from Ahmedabad. The collective national conscience was jolted by these acts and yet the local press seemed in sync with the mood in the state. Worse still, representatives of the Cong­ress, who should have been galvanised into action, were untraceable. Gujarat Congress chief and former chief minister Amarsinh Chaudhary was nowhere to be seen. Protesting the mayhem were only members of ngos; their voices did not carry far. In some places, though, local communities refused to be drawn into the rioting: a good exa­mple is a 20,000-population slum, Ram Rahim Nagar, that had both Hindus and Muslims living side by side, which maintained absolute peace. In many places, Dalits who had lived cheek-by-jowl with Mus­lims were being drawn into the conflict. Leaders of the Left and the Samajwadi party did arrive in town on the night of February 28, but they were unable to get the police commissioner to act.
News of the trouble shook the Delhi esta­blishment. Defe­nce minister George Fer­nandes was dispatched to Ahmeda­bad to deploy the army (if the state government wanted it) and bring the situation under control. Fernandes, a socialist who had visited Ahmedabad in 1969 as an activist in the midst of major riots, was shocked by what he saw. I met him on March 2 at the Circuit House. Though I had no previous acquaintance with Fer­nandes, he sent away the chief secretary and other heads of civil administration, and sought a detailed report from me. It was clear from the conversation that Fernandes was getting contra-indications about the intention and seriousness of the government in trying to put down the violence. At the end of a three-hour conversation, Fernandes volunteered that he had heard the arsonists had been given three days to do whatever they wanted. I told him this was unconfirmed news off the grapevine. The meeting ended when minister of state for defence, Harin Pathak—who was also the Ahmedabad MP and a hardcore Hindutva man—barged into the room. He flung himself on the sofa: his body language suggesting that he did not want this meeting to continue. Meanwhile, Modi was seen doing nothing to control the situation. There were murmurs in senior police echelons that their chief had been asked to keep silent. Stories were doing the rou­nds about how Modi had called a meeting of senior civil and police officials at his home on the evening of February 27 saying that if there was a Hindu reaction it should be “allo­wed”. The allegation of such a statement being made by Modi has persisted for many years. But it has been denied by Modi, who was many years later quizzed by officials of the SIT.

 
 
The decision to bring the charred bodies to Ahmedabad was taken at a meeting presided over by Modi, despite being told it was ill-advised.
 
 
The SIT gave him a clean chit saying there was no “prosecutable evidence” to try Modi. Of course, the fact that such a meeting to review law and order was held has never been denied. I asked Modi’s then private secretary, Anil Mukim, whether his boss had ever spoken of allowing a “Hindu reaction”. He told me: “Not in my presence.” However, it is a fact that the decision to bring the bodies of those who perished in the Godhra carnage to Ahmedabad was taken at a meeting presided over by Modi, even though civil servants and police had warned that such a move was ill-advised and could lead to a law-and-order situation. The charred bodies were brought in trucks to Ahmedabad in the wee hours of February 28. This contributed towards inflaming the public mood, especially because no curfew had been imposed in anticipation of trouble. It was also strange that the bodies of those killed in Godhra were handed over to the office-bearers of the VHP, and not to the next-of-kin of the deceased.
Rioting started in the early morning of February 28. In one of the first instances, a British Gujarati Muslim family ret­ur­ning to its ancestral village was waylaid on the highway and killed. Modi’s minister Haren Pandya, who was later slain, told me he had also advised against a move to bring the bodies to Ahmedabad, but was shouted down by cabinet colleagues who said a “reaction” in Ahmedabad would benefit the BJP in the next elections. Pandya subsequently tend­ered this evidence in camera to a Citizens’ Tribunal comprising retired high court judges. He told them about a meeting of ministers where Modi had talked about allowing a “Hindu reaction”. I later asked Pandya whether he had, in fact, given such a testimony and what made him do so. He claimed he understood the “Hindu anger” as a reaction to the Godhra incident but could not reconcile with the killing of people in retaliation.
Incidentally, Pandya was also part of a mob which had participated in arson, but not killings. An inquiry by the nhrc later reported that the then home minister, Gordhan Zadaphia, had raised his fingers in a victory signal even as killings were going on. So bad were the riots that even a sitting Muslim judge of the Gujarat high court was targeted at his official residence. He had to be rescued by well-wishers and shifted elsewhere. The collector of Gandhinagar—a Muslim—had his car stoned. In many parts of the state, hoardings came up welcoming visitors to the ‘Hindu rashtra’. A sign in Ahmedabad welcomed them to ‘Karnavati’ (the anc­ient Hindu name of the place where Ahmedabad came up in 1411). When a journalist queried VHP president Keka Shastri how marauding crowds were able to target commercial establishments owned by Muslims—in spite of their carrying no board proclaiming their ownership—and leave out Hindu-owned establishments, he said that a list of the ownership of establishments—religion-wise—was available with his organisation.... Journalists like Sheela Bhatt believe (though these views do not have many takers) that when riots broke out after the Godhra carnage, Modi “got damn scared”, but persisted with (ill-advised) bravado.
Modi: The Man
Modi’s knack for gauging the public mood is attributed to his days in the RSS. Like all organisers, he was groomed to speak and listen to a huge number of people and gather information. “I am half a newsman,” remarked Modi when I entered his chief ministerial office one day, many years ago. Modi was reading reams of papers on his table: printouts of freshly-filed stories on the newswires. “The way he gossips is not funny...” says a journalist who knows him well. “He can be a newsman’s delight or nightmare, depending on which way you look at it,” says ano­ther reporter. His reason: Modi makes it a point to read and scrutinise newspapers and websites and react to the stories almost immediately. Most contemporaries of Modi across the nation are not known to be so alert and on the ball. This reliance on gathering information has also helped Modi develop another skill: that of public relations which, in some ways, is a related trade. A good example is the 3D technology Modi leveraged in the last election. Film director Mani Shankar from Hyderabad, who imported the technology from the UK where it is used to beam music shows, shared: “We did not approach Mr Modi with our services. His men sought us out.” Modi was dressed differen­tly each day for the 3D show: in an array of multi-coloured kurtas. A public relations specialist says Modi seems to bel­ieve in the dictum that “style is the man”. He is well-groomed, wears good clothes, dons Ray-Ban sunglasses and shows off pedicured feet with clipped nails and scrubbed skin.

 
 
When TOI reported how Modi and Advani entered Akshardham to pose next to the bodies of the slain assailants, Modi was incensed.
 
 
Those who know him well say he has been fond of good attire and personal grooming from the beginning. “He came from a very small town where most people did not iron their clothes. Modi, as a boy, had no access to ironing services. But he would try to press his clothes by using some heavy objects or whatever he could lay his hands on,” says journalist Darshan Desai who has researched his early days. RSS insiders remember how he ran afoul of his bosses in his early days in the organisation, when he trimmed his beard in order to look better. This apparently was not the norm in the RSS, at least then. In the early ’80s, he started patronising a barber—a Muslim incidentally—who had his salon close to the RSS headquarters and who gave him a Rajesh Khanna-style haircut. A few years later, Modi started riding a Bajaj Chetak scooter. After becoming chief minister, he began patronising Jade Blue, a clothing outfit in Ahmed­abad. Tailors from Jade Blue reportedly go to his house and take his measurements. The shop has now developed its own brand of Modi kurtas.
If stylish clothes go a long way in enhancing personality, so do pictures. Modi knows this well. If those who have had a peep at his portfolio are to be believed, it contains hundreds of shots of the big man striking various poses. Modi loves to project himself as a hero, a powerful man, destroying all villains. Any contra-projection ang­ers him. I got a taste of this on the morrow of the Akshardham incident in Sep­tem­ber 2002. When the Times of India reported how Modi and Advani ventured to enter the complex and pose next to the bodies of the two assailants who had been shot to death, I was greeted by an early morning call from an incensed Modi. “Why are you writing that we went in after the intruders were killed? It conveys that I am a weak man,” Modi said.
Analysts agree that Modi loves his image of an Alpha-Male. “He is especially the subject of adulation amongst women. Many well-educated, well-heeled women swoon over him. Many are head-over-heels in love with him, without knowing him personally,” confirm observers. “Gujarat is essentially a mercantile state with no martial tradition. Heroes of the Bollywood type, successful in doing the impossible, are conspicuous by their absence in Gujarat. Perhaps there is a perceived need for such heroes, especi­ally amongst women. The image of Modi satiates that need,” speculates Reema Desai, a 40-year-old Gujarati woman who lives in Mumbai. Many journalists on the Modi trail in the last elections confirm this adulation is waning.
Weaving fantasies is part of the Modi myth. Many in Gujarat who participated in the Navnirman movement of 1974 say Modi fans try to project him as the hero of the movement, when he did not even have a role in the affair. They also say it is ludicrous to suggest Jaya­prakash Narain was impressed by what he saw of Modi in those days. “This is absolute balderdash,” says social activist Hanif Lakdawala.”‘I am not too sure JP even encountered Modi.” “Wonder if such myth-making has the support of Modi,” says another student leader of those days. He points out how the cries of “dekho dekho kaun aaya, Gujarat ka sher aaya”, which greet Modi at election meetings, may not be all that spontaneous. Even Modi’s men do not deny their boss has the knack for creating hype. Every­body agrees Modi is a good orator and an effective public speaker. Part of this ability is God-given and part developed by training in the RSS. But almost everybody agrees Modi hits opponents below the belt and resorts to cheap humour that titillates but is not expected of a person so high in public life. “To that extent, he has not overgrown his mofussil days. Such cheap diatribes are lapped up by rural crowds,” says a minister in his government. A TV anchor says Modi used to be crude on the box before he became chief minister—“he was ready for a fight and often his facial expressions put off many vie­wers.” All through Election 2012, he referred to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as ‘Maun’ Mohan Singh, alluding to the silence he maintained on many public matters. “This is the sort of stuff that goes around in SMS jokes, not fit to be part of a speech of a leader,” says journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta. The instance of Modi labelling Sunanda Puskhar as the “Rs 50 crore girlfriend” of Congressman Shashi Tharoor also indicates the Modi brand of humour. This author also recollects how he was the butt of this cheap humour in the midst of the 2002 riots. A colleague received a phone call from an inspector of the intelligence branch, who informed her that there was the threat of physical attack upon the author. The author immediately called up the chief secretary and dgp, who were nonplussed and seemed to be ignorant of the threat. A little while later, Modi called up the author himself and guffawed: “What is all this that I am hearing about a life threat to you? Arrey, I only told the intelligence to ensure your safety. After all, you are writing so much against the police that I thought that somebody could attack you, ha ha ha.” In another instance when the author encountered Modi in public after many months, during which he had lost a substantial amo­unt of weight, the big man said: “You seem to be suffering from diabetes.” The statement was greeted by a stunned silence by Modi’s men. A minister in attendance tried to cover up by saying that Modi sahib was wondering whether you have started going to the gym.
Can he become prime minister?
It takes neither a degree in rocket science, nor one in psephology, to guess who was happiest when Modi won the Gujarat assembly elections for the third time in a row. Of course, the party in question will never admit to its euphoria in public. But when Modi took oath at a glittering event at Sardar Patel Stadium, leaders of the Congress—albeit priva­tely—applau­ded the loudest. To them, Modi’s victory was a certain sign that he would inevitably make his way towards Delhi as the BJP’s next prime ministerial candidate—and therewith consolidate minority votes across the nation against the BJP and in favour of the Congress.
“Muslims in Gujarat—to some extent—may have made their peace with Modi, but in minority circles across the nation, he is nothing but a hate figure. His projection of being a great performer on the economy front cuts no ice with the minorities,” says a senior Congress leader.

Photograph by Siddharaj

 
 
With Modi being projected as PM candidate, Congress believes it’ll get Muslim votes. But Muslims are fed up of being taken for granted.
 
 
India’s electoral system—called the first-past-the-post—does not require a candidate (or a party) to get a majority of votes to get elected. Often, candidates and parties come to power based on minority votes. Now consi­der the fact that Muslims make up nearly 15 per cent of the electorate. The belief in Congress circles is that Muslims will vote for the Congress with a vengeance. To get another 15 per cent is not such a great deal, feel Congress leaders. In fact, the victory of the Congress-led alliance in both 2004 and 2009 is attributed to the votes it got from Muslims. This was topped up by votes from other sections. The performance of the Vajpayee gover­nment (1999-2004) was good and India was really ‘shining’. In 2004, liberalisation was more than a decade old and the benefits of reforms were being felt across India in the form of higher disposable incomes and better lifestyles. Vajpayee’s image was good and the government did not provoke a strong anti-incumbency. Yet, much to analysts’ surprise, the NDA government was booted out of power. What happened?
“Vajpayee had made an attempt to make Modi quit his post in 2002, but failed. The consolidation of Hindu votes in Gujarat brought Modi back to power in Gujarat, but the consolidation of minority votes against the BJP forced the government out of power in New Delhi,” confesses a BJP insider. The same sentiment returned the Congress-led alliance back to power in 2009, at a time when there were murmurs that Modi could possibly cross over to Delhi. “The Congress allowed itself to be destroyed in Gujarat by Modi, but in the process strengthened itself at the federal level,” chuckles a Congress leader.
The Congress is hoping for an encore in 2014, but politics seldom follows a predictable path. For one, Muslims are fed up of being taken for granted by the Congress government. “They feel that they have nowhere else to go and that with the BJP around, they will have no option but to vote for the Congress. But this is a fallacious belief,” says Altaf Hussain, a Muslim businessman from Mumbai. “I would say that many Congress leaders are soft Hindutva proponents who pay only lip service to our cause.”
Changing alignments in the Muslim pattern of voting have been confirmed by the estrangement of the Majlis-e-Itte­hadul-Muslimeen (MIM) from the Congress. Staunch allies for nearly three decades, the MIM, which is a force in Hyderabad (where Muslims constitute some 35 per cent of the population), has walked out of the UPA alliance in New Delhi and the Congress government in Andhra Pradesh. Though he refrains from calling Sonia Gandhi names, MIM party chief Asaduddin Owaisi has been shouting from the rooftops that the Andhra Pradesh chief minister is ‘communal’. MIM is now expected to join hands with a breakaway Congress faction: the YSR Congress led by Jagan Reddy. The latter, who has ruled out a tie-up with the BJP, favours a loose alliance of third parties across the nation. Such an alliance may potentially include the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) of Sharad Pawar in Maharashtra, Mulayam Singh Yadav’s Samajwadi Party in UP and the YSR Congress in Andhra Pradesh. This alliance may tilt the Muslim votes in its favour, so the Congress gambit may be misplaced. But this will be of little solace to Narendra Modi, other than the fact that the two combinations may undercut each other. In fact, this is what had happened in the recent Gujarat elections over some seats: though the Congress could have won because of sizeable Muslim votes, the BJP did instead. The presence of independent Muslim candidates divided the vote, thereby affecting the Congress. A prime example was the Jamalpur-Khadia assembly seat in Ahmeda­bad, where Muslims account for 60 per cent of the votes. Yet the BJP had the last laugh, because up against the Congress Muslim candidate was another—a rebel Congress Muslim. They cut into each others’ votes and the BJP candidate sailed through.
Senior leaders of the BJP are falling over each other to congratulate Modi and hail him as the suitable prime ministerial candidate. Many of them, both BJP national leaders as well as satraps of different states, scrambled to Ahmedabad to attend Modi’s investiture. Still insiders say that the last thing they would want is to have him lead the party.
“Even the RSS, the mother organisation of the Sangh parivar where Modi began his political life, is opposed to him,” confides a party insider. “The RSS is a disciplined party but everybody who knows him well is aware that Modi will not listen to Nagpur at all and hijack the BJP to serve his own end,” the insider, who has risen from the ranks of the RSS and is now in the BJP, discloses. Incidentally, the RSS, even in Gujarat, is opposed to Modi because of his ‘self-willed’ ways. If party veterans are to be believed, the trio of L.K. Advani, Arun Jaitley and Sushma Swaraj, too, would like to keep Modi at bay. “Advani is already 85 years old. This is his last chance to become prime minister. He would not like Modi to upstage him,” party sources reveal. Though Advani was Modi’s original benefactor in the BJP, those who keep close tabs on the relations between the two aver that the former is totally dependent on the Gujarat chief minister to get elected to the Lok Sabha from the Gandhinagar constituency. They also point to how Modi has drawn more applause at election rallies they have jointly addressed since 2004.

Photograph by Jitender Gupta

 
 
“In some ways you don’t have to formally designate him candidate for PM,” says a political analyst. “He is already so in public perception.”
 
 
The crafty ‘legal eagle’, Arun Jaitley, is close to Modi and has contributed hugely to the latter’s cause. “Jaitley is a great strategist and a brilliant lawyer. But he has no political base of his own,” says the insider. He deduces that even if a BJP-led coalition comes close to power, it could succeed only if it has a prime ministerial candidate acceptable to all. “That means a Manmohan Singh-type of prime minister. Jaitley feels that he himself could fit the bill,” a party insider asserts. Of course, there is no concrete proof of Jaitley’s strategy. But the insider says that if Modi fails to become prime minister, Jaitley wants that Modi should support him. The argument is that since the lawyer has no political base, Modi will not be threatened by him and therefore he can afford to bide his time as Jaitley holds the reins. But in the corridors of power in Delhi, the belief is that the relations between Modi and Jaitley are a bit frosty these days. This would imply that if push comes to shove, it cannot be taken for granted that Modi will root for Jaitley, who is a Rajya Sabha MP from Gujarat and has got a fresh, six-year mandate in 2010. But the days preceding his nomination were marked by intense speculation that the Delhi lawyer would have to seek accommodation from some other state. Sushma Swaraj wants to be the first woman prime minister of the BJP. Indeed, during Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray’s lifetime, she had sought and secured his support too. But to the RSS, Swaraj is suspect because of her husband Swaraj Kaushal’s socialist background. There is no love lost between her and Modi either. Her comments at Vadodara amidst the heat of electioneering, that Modi could be a prime ministerial candidate, are attributed to convoluted political logic that only politicians can make head or tail of. In the words of a BJP insider, Sushma, by projecting him as a prime ministerial candidate, wanted to keep Modi in Gujarat till 2014 and prevent him from becoming the BJP president. The argument goes that as BJP president in Delhi, Modi would consolidate his position faster than if he were to remain in Gandhinagar as the chief minister. In the event, Modi did not press for his candidature after (Nitin) Gadkari stepped down. This was perhaps due to strategic reasons and internal opposition.
Strong BJP chief ministers like Shivraj Singh Chauhan of Madhya Pradesh and Raman Singh of Chhattisgarh have not shown any inclination to bid for the top post. The possibility of them throwing in their hats at a later stage cannot be discounted. “Our chief minister’s performance has been brilliant. Chauhan is a great administrator and has brought so much investment into the state. But he works silently and does not make a big song and dance like Modi. He is good material to be a prime minister,” says Anil Sharma, a merchant from Indore and a BJP supporter. There is a similar support for Raman Singh whose strong stand against Maoists is cited as evidence of his being a strong man. It is not that Modi does not know of these inner machinations of senior leaders of his party. But he also knows that he is very popular with the middle-rung leaders and the rank-and-file of the party, the kind of people whose personal ambitions don’t clash with his and who are looking for a leader who can take them to victory. Modi knows that it is only a BJP victory that can give such smaller leaders a share of the spoils of office. He is also aware that these leaders consider him the only one cut out for the job. “Modi sahib will overpower the opposition inside the party bec­ause of the massive support he enj­oys at the grassroots level. The BJP bosses may lock the doors in Delhi, but our leader will break open the lock and with the tremendous support of the state party workers Modi will be anointed as the bjp’s PM candidate. A chief minister like Shivraj Singh Chauhan can be good but they can­not lead the party to victory nationally,” says a Modi acolyte in Gujarat....
“In some ways you don’t have to formally designate him as prime ministerial candidate of the BJP, he is already so in public perception,” a political analyst suggests. Though it is virtually a fait accompli that Modi will be the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate, can he actually pull off a victory and occupy South Block? Or will the Congress gambit pay off?

(Nag is currently resident editor, Times of India, Hyderabad, and was chief of bureau in Ahmedabad during the riots.)

On the Gujarat Government seeking 'death penalty' for Kodnani and others


The Gujarat Government's decision to seek the death penalty for former BJP minister Maya Kodnani and nine other convicts for their role in the Naroda Patiya massacre, during the Gujarat Carnage of 2002, is a sheer gimmick and smacks of a very clever ploy to defocus from more important issues.

The involvement of Kodnani, Bajrangi and several others in the terrible killings was well-known in 2002 itself.Yet she was promoted and made a Minister in the Government. All these years,the Government did all it could to defend the accused  -including Kodnani, Bajrangi and their ilk!

The ruse now is to deflect from the Protest Petition filed by Mrs Zakhia Eshan Jafri  which definitely names people and the events during the carnage!

Besides, the investigative expose on the SIT Report by  a leading news channel a couple of days ago, clearly shows how the SIT Report has left out important records and documents, which conclude that the Carnage was neither sudden nor spontaneous.

One also wonders if the "death penalty" threat is to prevent Kodnani and others from singing about their more powerful mentors?

The Gujarat Government should now focus on the above , to help expedite the process and bring to justice all the accused(in all cases -also those who managed to go scot-free) of the Carnage and in particular accused Number ONE in the Zakhia petition

Fr Cedric Prakash sj
PRASHANT  
-  A Centre for Human Rights, Justice and Peace
 
Hill Nagar, Near Kamdhenu Hall, Drive-in Road, Ahmedabad - 380052, Gujarat, India

Phone : +91  79   27455913,  66522333
Fax : +91  79  27489018
Email: sjprashant@gmail.com
www.humanrightsindia.in

Monday, April 15, 2013

Mrs Zakia Jafri files her Protest Petition



April 15, 2013
Urgent: Press release
Mrs Zakia Jafri files her Protest Petition
A cold-blooded and clear-cut conspiracy to manipulate the tragic Godhra incident -- from the moment of the terrible news  -- was planned and executed by Chief Minister Mr Narendra Modi (Accused no 1), in close consultation, especially with then Health Minister Mr Ashok Bhatt (accused no. 2) , Urban development minister, IK Jadeja (accused no 3) and other co-accused cabinet colleagues and especially VHP leader Mr Jaydeep Patel (accused no 21), with whom the CM was first in touch with soon after the tragic Godhra incident. This was aimed at ensuring that the tragedy at Godhra becomes ready fuel for the meticulously planned massacre of innocent Muslims all over Gujarat.
Mrs Zakia Ahsan Jafri today filed her Protest Petition praying for the rejection in toto of the SIT final report dated 8.2.2012, making a cogent case for the charge-sheeting of all 59 accused listed in her complaint dated 8.6.2006, beginning with Mr. Modi the chief minister of Gujarat.
The protest petition that runs into 514 pages also has three volumes of annexures and ten CDs. The Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) with its entire legal team has assisted in this painstaking and voluminous exercise.
The Petitioner strongly argues that the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) had adequate documents and statements to come to a prima facie finding against all the accused. SIT, however decided to cover up the crimes and has gone out of its way to misguide the Court and give a clean chit to the accused.
Phone call records show Mr Modi (accused no 1, A-1) to have been in close touch with Mr Jaideep Patel (A-21) immediately after information of the Godhra tragedy comes in, even before he meets home department officials and ministers. Thereafter, there is a hasty and publicly conducted post-mortem at Godhra, out in the public against all law and procedure while a crowd of VHP workers was present. Mr Modi is present while this happens.
Thereafter, while passions are being cynically stoked, another sinister decision to hand over the dead bodies of Godhra victims to VHP strongman Mr Jaideep Patel (A-21) is taken at a mini-cabinet meeting presided by Mr Modi in Godhra, at which co-accused ministers are physically present. Mr Jaideep Patel too is present at the meeting. Then Godhra district magistrate, Mrs Jayanti Ravi has clearly stated that Mr Jaideep Patel was present at the meeting. 
The Protest Petition goes into great detail, relying on documents from the investigation papers, on how the administration and police were deliberately paralysed and neutralised by the conspiracy hatched by Mr Modi, Co-accused, then Gujarat DGP Mr K Chakravari (A-25), then police commissioner, Ahmedabad, PC Pande (A-29), then additional chief secretary, home, Mr Ashok Narayan (A-28) and other key members of the bureaucracy and police who connived as co conspirators in the conspiracy.
Key field reports from the SIB (state intelligence bureau) from all districts were given to the SIT by January 2010, i.e., full three and a half months before the SIT submitted its first investigation report to the Supreme Court on 12.5.2010. These reports reveal a grim ground level reality: gross provocations and bloodthirsty slogans by VHP workers from 4 p.m. onwards on the afternoon of 27.2.2002 (“Khoon ka badla khoon se lenge”, blood for blood) while Mr Modi had still not left for Godhra.  
Phone records of the chief minister’s office (CMO) reveal that he went to the airport to catch a helicopter for Godhra via Meghaninagar where the massacre at Gulberg society the next day was organized. Phone records of the CMO also show that after landing in Ahmedabad from Vadodara by aircraft (where he had travelled by road from Godhra on his return journey) too, Mr Modi and officials of the CMO who accompanied him are located at Meghaninagar late evening (mobile phone call records).
Just a week before the Godhra incident, on  22.2.2002, Mr Modi had won in the Rajkot bye-election by a slender margin (a few thousand votes). The glory of his victory had been dimmed with minority votes going heavily against him. Former CPI leader and later Parliamentarian from the Congress, Ahsan Jafri had been an active campaigner against Mr Modi in the bye-election lived in Gulberg Society, in Meghaninagar. 
In a sinister furtherance of the conspiracy, the late night meeting at Mr Modi’s residence effectively neutralised the police and administration from doing its constitutional duty. The Protest Petition states that the credibility of the evidence related to the critical 27.2.2002 meeting must be tested during trial and that it was not the job of the investigating agency to pre-judge the issue, acting like a court overstepping its jurisdiction to protect and save powerful accused. 
Evidence from Police Control Room (PCR) records submitted by Mr. PC Pande to the SIT after 15.3.2011 reveal cynical and cold-blooded mobilization of RSS workers and VHP men at the Sola Civil hospital from 4 a.m. onwards on 28.2.2002 in aggressive anticipation for the arrival of the dead bodies. Repeated PCR messages, that the home department under Mr. Modi (A-1, who held the home portfolio) and Mr PC Pande (A-21) were trying to conceal, show that both in Ahmedabad and in several locations all over Gujarat crowds were mobilized to aggressively parade bodies with bloodthirsty sloganeering, inciting mobs to attack innocent Muslims.
The then joint police commissioner, Ahmedabad, Mr Shivanand Jha, also an accused in the complaint (A-38), was jurisdictionally in charge of Sola Civil Hospital in Zone 1. As the messages extracted below show, repeated PCR messages desperately ask for bandobast; they speak of the staff and doctors of the hospital being under threat; of a 5,000-6,000 strong mob accompanying the bodies and finally one message also says that “riots have broken out.”
Yet Mr Modi, the entire Home department and the accused under him and individuals accused including Mr Chakravarti (A-25) and Mr PC Pande (A-29) in collaboration with the SIT have strived hard to conceal this evidence. While such aggressive funeral processions were allowed in Ahmedabad, an equally explosive situation prevailed simultaneously in Khedbrahma, Vadodara, Modasa, Dahod, Anand etc. A cynical government under Mr Modi and his co-accused conspirators has done their level best to conceal this evidence. 
The PCR records -- that the SIT was trying hard to conceal -- also reveal that while the Ahmedabad police under Mr PC Pande and the home department  under Mr Modi and then MOS, home Mr Gordhan Zadaphiya (A-5 ) had enough forces to escort a VHP leader known for his inciteful slogans, Acharya Giriraj Kishore, from the airport to the Sola Civil hospital to accompany the processionists, shouting filthy hate speeches and murderous slogans. But they did not have enough forces to send to Naroda Patiya where 96 persons were massacred in broad daylight (charge-sheet figures in the Naroda Patiya case, though more deaths have been recorded) and 69 persons at Gulberg society the same day and around the same time aggressive processions were being allowed. Mr Modi allowing and openly supporting the bandh and neutralising his administration, decided to give the RSS, VHP, BD mobs a free run of the Gujarat streets to massacre innocents. 
As bad or worse were the provocations and hate speeches that were cynically allowed and encouraged by Mr. Modi and his administration. PCR messages of Ahmedabad and SIB messages from all over the state are testimony to this incendiary mobilisation.
Warnings Ignored (from SIB and PCR messages)
12:30 pm on the 27th February: An SIB officer through fax no 525 communicated to the headquarters that there were reports that some dead bodies would be brought to Kalupur Hospital station in Ahmedabad city. "So communal violence will occur in the city of Ahmedabad; so take preventive action."
Another SIB message numbered as Out/184/02 again warned about communal incidents if bodies were brought to Ahmedabad. "Communal violence will occur in the city. So take preventive action."  The same message said that karsevaks had given explosive interviews to a TV station at Godhra and had threatened to unleash violence against the Muslims.  
At 1:51 hours and again at 1:59 hours on the 28th February there were panic messages by wireless police vans positioned at Sola Hospital demanding immediate protection from Special Reserve Police platoons and the presence of DCP Zone 1.
Message at 2:44 hours on 28.2.2002: the motor cavalcade has reached Sola Civil Hospital.
Page No. 5790 of Annexure IV, File XIV reveals that at 04:00 am a mob comprising of 3,000 swayamsevaks, that is the members of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), had already gathered at the Civil Sola Hospital.
At 7.14 a.m. the PCR van again informs the Police Control Room that a large mob had assembled at the hospital. (Page 5796 of Annexure IV, File XIV of the documents).
Again, another message three minutes later at 7:17 a.m. (Page 5797 of Annexure IV, File XIV of the documents) says that a mob of 500 people was holding up the traffic.
Ten bodies were taken to Ramol, an area near Naroda and a massive funeral rally of over 5,000-6,000 mourners took the bodies to Hatkeshwar crematorium in the afternoon.
At 11:55 am a PCR message is sent out saying that the Hindu mob had become violent and had set a vehicle on fire and was indulging in arson on the highway.
Message at 11.55 a.m. on 28.2.2002 (Page No. 6162 Annexure IV File XV) saying that “Sayyed Saheb, the Protocol Officer had informed Sola-1 that riots have started at Sola civil hospital at the High Court where the dead bodies were brought.”
Again, there is another message with no indication of time (Page No..6172 of 28.2.2002) that states that the officers and employees of the hospital had been surrounded by a 500 strong mob and they could not come out”. The message also made a demand for more security for the civil hospital at Sola.
Annexure IV File XIV- Message No. 5907 and 5925 at 11:58 a.m. on 28.2.2002 shows that when 10 dead bodies were taken from Ramol Jantanagar to the Hatkeshwar cremation ground, a crowd of 5,000-6,000 persons accompanied this procession.
On the morning of 28.2.2002, a SIB message (on page 258 of Annexure III File XIX, message No. Com/538/28/2/02) says that a funeral procession was allowed to take place at Khedbrahma, a town in Sabarkantha district. The message adds that soon after the funeral procession 2 Muslims on their way to Khedbrahma were stabbed and the situation had become very tense.
The subsequent message at page No. 262 of the same file (Annexure III File XIX) mentions that 150 Bajrang Dal workers were on their way from Ayodhya to Khedbrahma.
Another message at page 254 (Annexure III file XIX) – Com/574/2002 sent out at 15.32 p.m. on 28.2.2002 states that one more victim of the tragic train burning at Godhra, Babubhai Harjibhai Patel, resident at Vaghrol, Tal. Vadali in Sabarkantha was brought back and a funeral procession was organised in the town.
Warnings about the deliberate mobilization
At page 365 of Annexure III File XXI( D-166) message No. 73/02 dated 28.2.2002 sent by the ACP(Intelligence) Surat Region to State Intelligence Bureau Headquarters at Gandhinagar, says that between 9-10 a.m. on the morning of 28.2.2002, a meeting was held at Sardar Chowk in Vapi Town where Dinesh Kumar Behri of VHP and Acharya  Brahmbatt of Bajrang Dal , Jawahar Desai of BJP and Vinod Chowdhary of RSS made inflammatory speeches regarding the incident at Godhra and called upon the Hindus to unite.  
Another message at page 188 in Annexure III, File XVIII sent at 20:38 hours on the day of the Godhra train burning tragedy, i.e., 27.2.2002, mentions the following: “Dilip Trivedi, the General Secretary of VHP and Joint Secretary Dr. Jaideep Patel and Kaushik Mehta in a Joint Statement issued by them have declared that innocent Ram Bhatt’s have been attacked and hence Gujarat Bandh has been declared. They have also stated that the attack on the Ramsevaks returning from Ayodhya was pre-planned by the Muslims. Innocent ladies were molested and compartments were set on fire and Ramsevaks were burnt alive.”  
The joint statement issued by the three senior-most office bearers of Gujarat VHP’s unit was clearly designed to stoke communal passion. A reasonable response would have been an immediate government clampdown on such public utterances and if required putting all these trouble makers under preventive detention.  But no such action was taken. The VHP called for a bandh on the 28th February and the BJP, the ruling party, openly supported the bandh call. The State, instead of clamping down on the bandh call, gave the VHP leaders and its cadres a free reign and a license to kill. 
At page 345, the message titled Vardhi No. 24 contained in Annexure III File XIX dated 27.2.2002 sent from D.O., Ahmedabad to the Intelligence Office at Virangam (Virangam is in Ahmedabad rural district) stated that 50 to 75 members of the VHP and Bajrang Dal had gathered at Virangam town chali and in the Golwada area and the situation was very tense.
Another message in the same file, i.e., Annexure III, File XVIII (D-160) at Page No. 19 Message No. 531 ifrom SIB Police to KR Singh at 1810 hours on 27.2.2002 said that, “on 27.2.2002 at 4.30 p.m. when the train arrived at the Ahmedabad Railway station, the kar sevaks were armed with ‘dandas’ and shouting murderous slogans ‘khoon ka badla khoon’ and ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’.”  
Fax Mes. D-1/  HA/ Jaher Sabha/ Junagadh/ 311/02 dated.27.2.02 at10.12 pm sent by PI, CID, Int. Bhavnagar to IG, Guj. State IB, Gandhi Nagar said that Sadhu Samaj president Gopalnandji gave an agitated speech at Junagadh Kadva chowk, on dt.27.2.02 between19.30 to 21.00 hrs. The message then goes on to name specific local VHP leaders and says that they expressed their condolences to Kar Sevaks and then delivered hate speeches and urged all Hindus to unite and told the audience to chop the hands and legs of our enemies. They said in their speech that the incident that occurred at Godhra in the morning at 7.30a.m., yet there was no reaction from the Hindus which was very unfortunate. “Muslims who live in India with sincerity and patriotism, we don’t have any agitation against them. But we have objections against those who lived in India and favour Pakistan and carried out activities against the country. Anti- national activities are being done in Madrasas. We have objection against it. We do not have any kind of objection against spiritual religious education to the children. Pooja prathna at the temple and pray in the Masjid but Pakistan Zindabad is not right. Above mention ideas were expressed by them.” 
Fax Mes. Com/HM/550/ 02 Dt.27.2.02 23:59 Out No.398 from ACP, Int. G’nagar Region to IG, Guj. State IB, Gandhi Nagar says that 50 Karsevaks travelling by a special bus from Ahmedabad reached Modasa centre in village Vadagam at Taluka Dhansura at around 18:30 pm on 27.2.02. “They were received by a mob of 500 people and these kar sevaks addressed the mob and told the people how the compartment of Sabarmati Express was attacked. People present in the mob got excited and at 21:30 p.m. people from around the village gathered and the mob swelled to a huge size. To maintain law and order the force was not sufficient and about 10 paan bidi shops were set on fire. Vehicles like Jeep, Maruti and Ambassador were set on fire. Vehicles and shops seem to belong to Muslims. One Yasinbhai Multani’s shop at Kalol center TaKadi, Bavlu PS village Kalyanpur was burnt down by the mob”. 
Throughout February 28, 2002 while fires were set all over Ahmedabad city, PCR records show that repeated calls from different areas to the Fire Brigade drew went answered.
Table of Phone Records 
Call Type
Cell-No (Name)
Duration Secs
Date-Time
Dialed / Received No – Name
Outgoing
9825037439
A P Patel
(Accused No 1, Mr Modi)
77
27.2.2002
09:39:38

9825023887
Mr Jaideep Patel VHP General Secretary
(Accused No 21)
Outgoing
9825037439
A P Patel
(Accused No 1, Mr Modi)
20
27.2.2002
09:41:39
9825023887
Mr Jaideep Patel VHP General Secretary
(Accused No 21)
 The Protest Petition prays for the charge sheeting of all the accused, a transfer of the further investigation to an independent agency and an admitting of the Petition.
(Trustees, Citizens for Justice and Peace)
I.M. Kadri                   Taizoon Khorakiwala               Nandan Maluste     
Cyrus Guzder             Arvind Krishnaswamy             Javed Akhtar
Alyque Padamsee       Anil Dharker                          Ghulam Peshimam
Rahul Bose                 Javed Anand                            Teesta Setalvad
Cedric Prakash


The colour Maps attached are annexed to Protest Petition

Saturday, April 13, 2013

HUMAN RIGHTS: THE BASIS FOR PEACE ON EARTH


On April 11th 2013, we observed the GOLDEN JUBILEE of 'PACEM IN TERRIS' the path-breaking and visionary Encyclical written by Pope John XX111. In 2005 ,I was invited by the GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY,USA to deliver its Annual "Pacem in Terris" lecture...here it is

HUMAN RIGHTS: THE BASIS FOR PEACE ON EARTH
- Fr. Cedric Prakash sj*


Dr. John J. DeGioia, The President of Georgetown University,
Fr. Phil Burroughs,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am extremely honoured and privileged to be invited by the Georgetown University to deliver a lecture in the Pacem in Terris series.  This premier institution has produced some of the finest people in the world; besides, those who have been invited to lecture in this series before me, are people of great eminence and standing. It is therefore with a sense of honour and humility, that I share with you this afternoon, my thoughts on "Human Rights : The Basis for Peace on Earth.”
At the outset, I would like to visit the situation and the times of  Pacem in Terris in order to understand its relevance for us today more than forty years later.  
            Pacem in Terris draws attention to three distinctive characteristics of the world of the early sixties.  First, the working classes were slowly emerging in the social, economic, political and cultural spheres as they insisted “that they be regarded as men with a share in every sector of human society" (# 40).   Secondly, women were "becoming ever more conscious of their human dignity" and claimed “both in domestic and in public life the rights and duties that befit the human person" (# 42) and thirdly, men and women all over the world desired “the rank of citizens in independent nations". The modern world, thus took "an entirely new appearance in the field of social and political life" (# 42). 
            It is indeed amazing that the very conditions, to which Pacem in Terris drew attention to forty-two years ago, are the very conditions which are prevalent in our world today which has become so fragmented due to consumerism and the ills of globalization, due to religious and ethnic violence, and due to war and terrorism. The end of the cold war broke down several barriers and this in turn saw the emergence of new nation States. This period has also been pock-marked with civil, religious and ethnic strife in several parts of the world. Like the times of  Blessed Pope John XXIII, which was the beginning of nuclear proliferation, Peace today,  for us remains as distant and elusive.  
Pope John XXIII makes human rights the bulwark of his encyclical saying that peace is possible only if and when the rights of every human being are addressed. Pacem in Terris goes on to list eight broad dimensions of human rights (most of them had earlier found expression in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) like the rights to proper development of life, to basic security and to religion and conscience. And emphatically stating that these rights are “universal, inviolable and inalienable”.
Pacem in Terris  therefore has its basis in Human Rights.  It observes that peace needs to be based on an order "founded on truth, built according to justice, vivified and integrated by charity, and put into practice in freedom". 
I need to situate and provide a focus for this lecture – and for me personally, there is no other reality that I know better, than my own home state of Gujarat in north-west India. It is not that the rest of the world does not need peace….. or that there are no human rights violations in other parts of the world…..But the fact remains that Gujarat today is a microcosm of what is India. Whatever happens in Gujarat is bound to have an impact on the rest of India. And if this impact happens to be negative then there will definitely be repercussions on the South Asian sub-continent. No, I am not politically naïve… The slogan on the walls of Ahmedabad was written in big and bold letters: “Gujarat today, India tomorrow!”
So I invite you in the course of this lecture to have a glimpse of Gujarat… to see how people yearn for peace and yet how this peace will never be attained until the rights of the poor, the weak, the marginalised, the minorities are addressed and respected in every possible way.
Truth, justice, love and freedom are human rights as we have said earlier. They also happen to be conditions for human rights. Join me then in journeying to see how each one of these dimensions is played out in Gujarat today.
           

 TRUTH
Pacem in Terris is very categorical in stating that peace needs to be based on an order founded on truth.
It was Gujarat that gave to the world, the apostle of truth and non-violence: Mahatma Gandhi. It was in Ahmedabad that he founded his Ashram on the banks of the river Sabarmati and for over a period of 14 years, he launched a movement which gave India her Independence in 1947 after years of colonial rule.  “Gandhiji” as he was fondly called, adopted his twin doctrine of ahimsa (non-violence) and satyagraha (force of truth) from the Jain religion (which was founded by Lord Mahavir). The doctrine is simple: that if a human being or a society needs to triumph, it needs to base its efforts on means which are totally non-violent and in which truth will never be sacrificed at any cost. The combination proved lethal. Gandhiji triumphed, India won her freedom. However, the reality of Gujarat today is a far cry from the vision of Gandhi. Truth has been sacrificed at the altar of falsehood, deception and hate.
In 2002, Gujarat went through months of communal violence (In India we prefer to regard religious violence as communal violence because it is in fact a small group of fundamentalists who take law and order into their own hands. So it is not one religion fighting with the other as such but one small group claiming to represent that religion who adopt a very fundamentalist ideology) in what is regarded today as the Gujarat carnage. In the aftermath of the burning of the carriage of a train on Feb 27, 2002, in which about 60 people (mainly Hindus) were burnt to death, more than 2000 Muslims were mercilessly slaughtered in the city of Ahmedabad and in other parts of Gujarat State. Till today, it has not been established as to who was responsible for the burning of the train or if it was a mere accident. The fact that people had to die such a terrible death did receive all round condemnation.
At this juncture I would like to make a small digression. For the last several years, we have the emergence of a small Hindu right wing group in India that follows an ideology that is known as Hindutva; this in a way is not representative of the wider dimensions of the Hindu religion. Yet because of their ideology which is essentially one nation, religion, one culture and their desire to make India a Hindu nation state they have assumed the role of speaking on behalf of all Hindus. From the very fact that the vast majority of the Hindus do not subscribe to their ideology and their way of functioning is a clear indicator that this group is not representative but they have been responsible for a great deal of hate and violence mainly against the Muslims, Christians, Tribals and Dalits over the years. The same group is held responsible for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi in 1948. Their posturing and publications constantly spew venom and they make no bones of the fact that they count Hitler as one of their ideologues.
But what was even more shameful and horrific was the manner in which Muslims were singled out, made responsible for the burning of the train and were brutalised in every possible manner, the details of which are too horrendous to enumerate at this point.  Human rights and other groups from Gujarat and the world over were forthright in their demand for wanting the truth of these massacres to be made public. More than three years down the road, the truth on this violence has not yet emerged. The people responsible, we know still roam the streets and some of them even hold high public office (Many of them motivated by the ideology of Hindutva).
The only consolation that one can have at this moment is that oft-said dictum “truth shall prevail.” This dictum is emblazoned on our national emblem: three standing lions which was a symbol of one of the most loved kings of India – the Emperor Ashoka. Below the symbol, Ashoka had the words Satyameva Jayathe meaning Truth shall triumph. For us Indians this is our most powerful and loved symbol.
Truth is also a culture and an attitude; something which has to be cultivated, a lesson which has to be taught and learnt.  We have classic examples even in this country of how a honest Abe rose to become the President of the United States. Today in Gujarat we educate our children (at a very impressionable age) with half truths, lies and prejudices which is a clear violation of a child’s right to be educated objectively and truthfully. I would like to highlight just a couple of examples from our Std. IX text book in Social Sciences (which was published by the Gujarat Government in June 2005). In the chapter on India’s freedom struggle, the role of Mahatma Gandhi (to whom I have just referred) is minimalised  and inspite of being widely regarded as the “Father of the Nation”, his picture does not figure among those who were supposed to have given freedom to India. Another noteworthy example, which might be of interest to this audience, is the section on Nazism and Hitler. Apart from the fact that both Hitler and his ideology are depicted in a rather positive manner, there is not a word mentioned about the concentration camps or the holocaust.
Truth is the first step in the acknowledgement of a wrong….towards reconciliation, harmony and peace.
Yes, human rights can flourish only in truth. But our reality is definitely a far cry from the beautiful prayer we say from one our sacred texts, the Upanishads:
“ From the untruth lead me to the truth
From darkness lead me to light
From death lead me to immortality”

JUSTICE
Pacem in Terris highlights the imperative for peace built according to justice.
It cannot be otherwise. Justice we are convinced is foundational to Peace. Only when there is justice we are able to ensure the protection of human rights.
A Citizens Tribunal headed by a former Justice of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Krishna Iyer, has brought out a report entitled ‘Crime against Humanity’, in which several people from every strata of society have been indicted for the Gujarat Carnage. The report emphatically states that justice was a major casualty in Gujarat and unless justice was restored there would be no real peace in the state.
Today, the victims of the Gujarat carnage are still denied justice and more than 2000 cases have to come up for hearing in our courts. Everybody knows that the key persons responsible for the violence continue living their lives as though nothing had happened with total immunity and with impunity too.
How does one interpret a reality that if one is a Muslim in Ahmedabad today, one cannot buy a house or have a business establishment in the western upmarket part of the city; one necessarily has to be confined to a ghetto and in some of these ghettos, for example in Juhapura, which borders one part of the city of Ahmedabad, thousands of Muslims live without access to a public transport system, a public banking service or even a public water and drainage system.
The very same group (who obviously follow the Hindutva ideology and have constantly demonised Muslims and Christians) have also systematically marginalised the Dalits (low-caste) and the Adivasis (tribals) of our State. The rights guaranteed to them in our Constitution are constantly denied to them. It’s unbelievable but true that in many of our villages, a low-caste (Dalit) does not have the right to drink water from the well of a higher caste community. There is a concerted move to re-name Adivasis (orginal inhabitants of the land) as Vanvasis (dwellers of the forests). Its common knowledge that they resent the latter nomenclature for the simple reason is that once the forests disappear they will lose their identity. Their identity is with the land and there have been moves by the powers that control their destinies to take away the land in which they have lived for hundreds of years.
One can go on highlighting the injustices that are rampant in our society. Injustices which prevent a person from his or her holistic development; which keep people at the level of subjugation, which are an affront to human dignity.

LOVE
Love is the next dimension highlighted in Pacem in Terris. Pope John XXIII strongly asserts that peace has to vivified and integrated by charity. Love is foundational in Christianity and all the worlds’ religion emphasise this one single aspect of the human spirit. It is love that helps us establish relationships. It is love that breaks down barriers.

The sad part of it is that all this is easier said than done. In Gujarat, concerted efforts are made to instil hate, prejudice, and discrimination; the targets more often than not are those belonging to minority communities. An ideology which flaunts the one nation, one culture, one religion theory has no room for anyone else who thinks differently, worships differently or even dresses differently! The defining statement is that “since they are not ‘like’ us, therefore they are not ‘us’… they do not belong here.”
An effort was made to bring together several Hindus to help put a stop to the violence that had engulfed Gujarat in 2002; the stock responses of many educated well-to-do friends were often ridiculous and dangerous. “Look what they have done to the WTC in the United States”. “Why do they have to have four wives and so many children?” “They deserve this because they support Pakistan in cricket.” When middle of the road folk have such strong biases one cannot help but wonder whether there can be any concrete expression of love? And where there is no attitudinal change can we dare hope for Peace?
We experience hate and prejudice even among little children as the games they enjoy most are violent ones in which the person belonging to the “other” community becomes the victim, the hunted, the evil one. Similar games are played in Hindu areas and in Muslim areas. In the Hindu side it is the “Muslim” who always has to be killed and in the Muslim side the “Hindu” always has to be killed. Expletives and abuses are always with reference to the other side.
Discrimination and prejudice are manifested in a variety of ways: when children have to be admitted to a school, when the youth apply for a job and if for example, as I mentioned earlier, a Muslim intends to buy an apartment in the upmarket part of the city.
It is obvious then, that unless these barriers are broken, unless we are able to transcend the narrow confines of bigotry and hatred and move towards the expression and action of sincere acceptance and love, we will never have true peace.

FREEDOM
Peace has to be put into practice in Freedom. The words of John XXIII ring loud and clear even today.
On March 26th, 2003, the Government of Gujarat unanimously passed the Freedom of Religion Act. This act is absolutely draconian in nature and goes against the constitutional freedoms guaranteed by the Indian Constitution and very specifically Article 25 which guarantees to every single citizen the right to preach, practice and/ or propagate his/ her religion. A significant point of this law is that if a person wants to change to another religion, then one necessarily has to take the permission of the civil authority; if this permission is not granted, and if one still changes then one is liable to a period of imprisonment and also to pay a heavy fine. An added clause to this that if the violator happens to be a minor, a woman, a tribal or a Dalit then the imprisonment and fine is just doubled. The irony is that even till today more than two years after the passing of this legislation, the rules necessary for governing the implementation of this law has not been framed, hence petty officials use this as the Damocles’ sword as was done to a groups of Dalits who wanted to convert to Buddhism recently.
Another dreaded law is the Prevention of Terrorism Activity (POTA) Over the past three years, this law in Gujarat has been selectively used only against the Muslims; they have been put in jail without giving them the possibility to apply for bail or to seek legal redress with the possibility of hearing their side of the story. One can go on illustrating example after example of how individual freedoms are trampled upon today. The fact remains that unless we create that environment in which every single citizen feels free and secure we will not be able to establish that freedom which our poet laureate Rabindranath Tagore prayed for in his celebrated epic Gitanjali (the song of God) which I use at the conclusion of this talk.
The challenges before us are many. As I said earlier, Gujarat is a great place and the idea why some of its negatives have been highlighted today is purely with a view that these need to be addressed in order to preserve the rich cultural heritage, the religious plurality and the tremendous diversity that exists in our society.
We need peace. But in order to have that peace, the rights of every single person have to be respected. Those rights which emerge from truth, justice, love and freedom.
In Sabarkantha District in the north of Gujarat, live a group of tribals called the Garasia Adivasis. Some of them still follow a tradition during the festival of Spring. On a certain day at the break of dawn, the whole village comes out to the beating of drums and loud shouts. They are in search of tiny black bird called “Devli”.  It normally nests in little thorny bushes. They easily find one and begin chasing it with their shouts and with the drumming. Since the Devli cannot fly high it ultimately falls panting with exhaustion and it is easily caught by a villager. Very ceremoniously the headman of the village to whom this bird is brought, feeds it with molasses and some butter. The bird is released and allowed to fly. The whole village waits with abated breathe to see where the bird will sit after the flight. If it sits on a dry branch, then that means the rain will not come and it will be a year of drought. If it sits on a green one it means good rains and a year of plenty. The story has a wonderful parallel in the ark of Noah which finds mention in the sacred texts of three of the world religions but of course there the bird is the dove with the olive branch.
In a way we are in a similar position today. We are not sure what the future holds for each one of us. But one thing is certain is that we who have gathered here do not have to rely on a little bird to tell us whether we can have peace on earth or not. We have the answer. It is an answer for which we need to take a stand and which has to be based on truth, justice, love and freedom. We need to create an ownership for them and make sure that these rights belong to all men and women of our times… only then we will have Peace on Earth.
As a conclusion, I invite you to pray with me the words of Rabindranath Tagore:
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high,
Where knowledge is free,
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls,
Where words come out from the depth of truth,
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection,
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sands of dead habit,
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever widening thought and action,
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake!

Thank you very much!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This lecture was delivered as part of the “Pacem in Terris” series at the Georgetown University, Washington D.C., USA on Monday, September 19, 2005.

*Fr. Cedric Prakash sj is the Director of PRASHANT, the Jesuit Centre of Human Rights, Justice and Peace based in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, North-west India. He is a member of the Citizens for Justice and Peace that set up the Concerned Citizens Tribunal to look into the Gujarat Carnage which took place in 2002; he has also testified before the US Commission on International Religious Freedom on the carnage. He is actively involved in the issues related to communal harmony, justice and peace. Among the various awards he has received are the Kabir Puraskar from the President of India for the promotion of communal peace and harmony in 1995 and the Rafi Ahmed Kidwai award for Humanitarian Service by the Indian Muslim Council, USA in 2003.

PRASHANT – A Centre for Human Rights, Justice and Peace
Street Address: Hill Nagar, Near Kamdhenu Hall, Drive-in-Road, Ahmedabad-380 052, Gujarat, India
Postal Address: P. Bo. 4050, Navrangpura PO, Ahmedabad – 380 009, Gujarat, India

Phone: 91 79 27455913, 55522333
Fax: 91 79 27489018

Pacem in Terris makes an exhaustive list of human rights which include the following:

  1. rights to life and worthy standard of living, including rights to proper development of life and to basic security (#11).
  2. rights of cultural and moral values, including freedom to search for and express opinions, freedom of information, and right to education (#'s 12-13).
  3. rights to religion and conscience (# 14).
  4. rights to choose one's state in life, including rights to establish a family and pursue a religious vocation (#'s 15 – 16).
  5. economic rights, including right to work, to a just and sufficient wage, and to hold private property (@'s 18 – 22).
  6. rights of meeting and association (# 23).
  7. right to emigrate and immigrate (# 25).
  8. political rights, including right to participate in public affairs and juridical protection of rights (#'s 26 – 27)
.