19.11.14

Clean chit for Modi #GodhraRiots

Though some Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bajrang Dal workers were found to be present at scattered places where riots erupted and (they probably) played some role, the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi or his government had no complicity in the riots: This, and many other observations, reportedly form the core of the Nanavati Commission report that was submitted on Tuesday.
After 12 years and 24 extensions, retired Justice G T Nanavati ­ the chairman of the two-member inquiry commission set up by Gujarat government to look into the 2002 Godhra Express carnage and the subsequent communal riots -submitted a 2,400-page report to Chief Minister Anandi Patel at her official residence. According to reports, the commission has given a clean chit to Modi and his government by stating that allegations of state complicity remain unproven.
Human right activists have accused the commission of being pro-establishment.They reiterated that the commission report is `far from the truth'. Justice Nanavati and his colleague retired Justice Akshay Mehta refused to comment on the contents of the report. CM Anandi Patel also maintained silence on this issue.
However, sources who scanned the report later admitted that it completely absolves Modi ­ who had been internationally criticized for mishandling the riots that claimed over 2,000 lives -of any wrongdoing.
The riots had taken place after the S-6 coach of the Sabarmati Express carrying kar sevaks from Ayodhya to Gujarat was set afire at Godhra station, killing 59 people.
In the past, human right activists had dubbed Gujarat riots as genocide and even lobbied internationally to persecute Modi for the riots that had torn apart the state. In 2005, the United States led by the then President George W Bush had denied Modi a visa under a 1998 US law barring entry to foreigners who have committed “particularly severe violations of religious freedom“.The commission, since its inception, has been accused of being biased towards Modi. Inordinate delays, overlooking of crucial evidence such as phone call records, ignoring witness statements, refusing to cross-examine Modi were some of the charged levied against the commission. Modi had dismissed these charges as the “pastime of pseudo-secularists and English media“.
Interestingly, sources say that the commission has taken the pseudo-secular theory forward in the report, by flaying the media for its role during the riots. The report categorically states, “After summoning hundreds of witnesses, both government and non-government, we have not found any reason to surmise that Gujarat government or those in power when the riots took place played any role in augmenting the communal tension....Exaggerated media coverage worsened the situation.“
The Nanavati commission also enclosed the report prepared by R K Raghavan, who headed the Supreme Court-appointed special investigation team that scrutinised the Gujarat riots, to collaborate their finding that “there is absolutely no evidence to suggest any complicity on part of the Gujarat government or Modi in the 2002 riots.“

The commission at present comprises retired judges G T Nanavati and Akshay Mehta. The panel had been constituted by Gujarat government on March 6, 2002, under the Commission of Inquiry Act in the wake of Godhra train carnage on February 27, 2002 and subsequent communal riots.
Initially, it was a one-member commission headed by Justice (retired) K G Shah. Following opposition by certain groups, it was turned into a two-member commission headed by Nanavati as its chairman.
In 2008, after the death of Justice Shah, Mehta was appointed to the commission.Mehta had been earlier criticised for granting bail to Babu Bajrangi who was accused of burning 97 people, all Muslims, to death in Naroda Patiya massacre. Bajrangi, who was later sentenced to life, had described Justice Mehta as “apna aadmi (our man)“ in a sting operation.
Human right activists, led by late human rights champion Mukul Sinha of Jan Sangharsh Manch, had opposed his appointment and threatened to boycott the commission proceedings. However, the government ignored their demands.
The 2002 riots happened after S-6 coach of the Sabarmati Express carrying kar sevaks from Ayodhya to Gujarat was burnt was set afire at Godhra station, killing 59 people.
The Nanavati commission has been criticised for not summoning Modi for cross-examination. Though the terms of reference were revised only in May 2004, nearly a year after the inquiry commission was set up. Interestingly, that Modi should be summoned for cross-examination as a point of inquiry was included in the panel's purview only after UPA-II came back to power in 2004.
Sinha had sent two applications (2007 and 2009) to the commission pleading that Modi be summoned as stated in the 2004 government notification. The commission turned down the applications in 2009, terming the allegation against Modi `vague' and `based on unwarranted assumptions'.
Sinha was also not allowed to cross-examine certain witnesses, such as the then home minister Gordhan Zadaphia, and former minister I K Jadeja (who allegedly sat in police control room and issued selective instructions), CM's private assistant Om Prakash, as well as Tanmay Mehta and Sanjay Bhavsar who were officers on special duty to the CM.
Evidence made available to the commission in the form of call details to prove that rioters were in constant touch with politicians was not analysed. Rahul Sharma, who was Bhavnagar SP during the 2002 riots, had given these records to the commission.

There's absolutely no evidence to show that either Modi, the then CM, his ministers or police officers had played any role in the Godhra incident or that there was any lapse on their part in the matter of providing protection, relief and rehabilitation to riot victims or noncompliance with NHRC directions.
There was no evidence to summon CM Modi for a cross-examination. The burning of S-6 coach of the Sabarmati Express on February 27, 2002 was a conspiracy.
The coach was targeted because kar sevaks were travelling in it. Arrangements were made and 140 litres of petrol had been collected to burn the train. It (train-burning) was a part of a larger conspiracy“ to “instil a sense of fear“ in the administration and create “anarchy“ in the state.
The riots that followed were spontaneous.
The state government was alert and summoned the army. At some places, a few Bajrang Dal and VHP workers were present when violence took place but action was initiated against them.

No comments: