|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
| << November10, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]CFJ approaches the Supreme Court |
November12, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]China Rocks The Geopolitical Boat: >> |
|
From: Sukla Sen <suklasen@yahoo.com> Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:13pm Subject: Prosecutor Subverting Prosecution! [Zahira's latest turn about only underscores further the complicity, and culpability, of the Gujarat administration under Narendra 'Killer' Mody. It, for the 'n'th time highlights that the administration stands firmly on the side of the accused, though the state itself had filed the case against them, and subsequently went in for an appeal against their acquittal by a lower court. Nothing could bring out more categorically their utter insincerity and duplicity. The Mumbai High Court's directive to file a written affidavit stating their position on Zahira's latest accusations is going to further compound their difficulties. It also again shows how absurd was their claim to the right to appoint the prosecutor in the case when their sole aim is to subvert the prosecution!. 'Killer' Mody himself went gaga over Zahira's volte face without bothering for a moment about its implications.] The Times of India November 11, 2004 LIE OF THE STATE: ZAHIRA SYMBOLISES FLAWS IN PROSECUTION PROCESS by Anil Dharker Who, or what, is Zahira Sheikh? Is she victim, heroine or mercenary? It's a tangled story, so she could be all of these at different times, or some of these at the same time... But if her case is confusing, it's only because everything that happened in Gujarat in February-March 2002 is topsy-turvy. To start with, what we call "the Gujarat riots" weren't riots at all. What took place was a state-sponsored pogrom against Muslims, planned by state-level politicians, executed by mobs led by local politicians while the police either stood by or participated in the mayhem. The indifference of law-enforcing agencies to record FIRs, collect evidence or protect witnesses was so obvious that the Supreme Court had to take the unprecedented step of transferring cases out of Gujarat. If that seemed like a victory for justice, it was short-lived because to prosecute a case, you need a prosecution. The prosecution, in this case, is the state of Gujarat and its various agencies, and in many instances, they should really be the defendants. Which is why when Zahira changed her testimony yet again recently to say that she couldn't identify the accused in the Best Bakery trial, she did so in the beaming presence of the Vadodara collector as well as the Vadodara commissio-ner of police, two gentlemen who forgot they were part of the prosecution! How do you prosecute when the prosecution seems keen to sabotage the case? There's only one way: You try and bypass official agencies as much as possible. It was this awareness that guided the actions of Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), an NGO of which I am a part. Immediately after the Gujarat violence CJP had FIRs registered and evidence recorded. A Citizens' Tribunal was appointed to record evidence from affected people. Headed by retired Supreme Court Justice Krishna Iyer and including other retired high court justices, the tribunal collected evidence from over 1,500 witnesses and victims. The tribunal's report is blood-curdling and damning, especially about the participation or connivance of officials and politicians in what happened. Unfortunately, this report is not official. Which is why the CJP petitioned the Supreme Court as early as April 2002 to get a high-level investigation into the Gujarat massacres starting with Godhra, before the evidence was destroyed. Sadly, that plea has become part of the court's backlog of cases. Will justice ever prevail in any of the cases in Gujarat? While the Best Bakery case has got all the attention, CJP has been responsible in launching 18 other cases dealing with incidents in places like Naroda and Sardarpura, once ordinary names which have now become associated with horror. Teesta Setalvad, CJP's secretary, now needs protection because of the many threats on her life, while the CJP's hands-on man in Ahmedabad has been under protection for over a year. CJP's funds are low (contrary to what Zahira believes) and it continues to function only because of emergency infusion of small sums from friends and well-wishers. Most of all, the range of forces out to subvert justice is formidable. Zahira stayed in Mumbai happily for a year, moving freely, even making three unescorted trips to Vadodara. But just before she was to testify in court, came her volte face, turning her erstwhile friends into sudden foes and her erstwhile foes into protective friends. Her new "friends" now give her "protection" of the kind chief ministers give their captive MLAs before the head-count to prove their majority. What compelling reason made her do a complete flip-flop, so much so that she has earned the wrath of her community and her neighbours in Vadodara have burnt her effigy? We don't have to be rocket scientists to figure out who are the potential beneficiaries of her changed testimony. But her advisors have probably miscalculated: How much credibility does Zahira have now? And they have overlooked the brave workers at the Bakery who have already testified, given eye-witness accounts of the horrific happenings and identified a considerable number of the accused. Whatever happens, these cases bring up much wider questions going beyond what happened in Gujarat. We already have the example of the anti-Sikh riots of 1984 which killed in excess of 2,000 people and resulted in not a single conviction in 20 years! Gujarat was worse because official connivance was open and unchecked. If the state is the criminal, who will book the state? You cannot expect NGOs to do the job every time. In any case, isn't the delivery of justice an essential duty of any government? Even with a Congress-led government in Delhi, there has been no change in the attitude of either the home or the law ministry, no sense of urgency in pursuing the cases. In this vacuum, do we then need an autonomous organisation, which is well-funded and dynamically led, which can suo moto take up cases anywhere in India? It will need to be flexible in its approach, taking the initiative when it can, cooperating with NGOs when it can't. It will need access to an independent investigative agency (like a new, improved CBI). And it will need the clout to stop state agencies from interfering in its cases. Sounds like a lot? It probably is. But who will deny that we need something like this? |
|
| << November10, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]CFJ approaches the Supreme Court |
November12, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]China Rocks The Geopolitical Boat: >> |
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |