22 April 2002
The Times of India
BSF record: Guilty are seldom punished
Siddharth Varadarajan and Manoj Joshi
New Delhi: If the people of Kashmir are not reassured by Union Home Minister L. K. Advani’s promise to punish the Border Security Force men accused of gang-raping a 17-year-old girl in Hullar village near Anantnag on Thursday, there’s a reason: Bijbehara.
Nine years after the BSF’s 74 Battalion opened fire on a large crowd of unarmed protesters in this small Kashmiri town, killing 37 persons, not a single jawan or officer has been punished. The massacre took place on October 22, 1993.
After strong strictures passed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), 13 BSF men were charged with murder. But the subsequent General Security Force Court (GSFC) trial led to their acquittal. When the NHRC sought to examine the transcripts of the trials in order to satisfy itself that the BSF had made a genuine attempt to secure convictions, the Vajpayee government refused. The NHRC then moved the Supreme Court in an attempt to secure justice for the victims. And that is where the matter stands.
In the early 1990s, the BSF was charged with the execution of innocents and torture. But in not a single case have the persons concerned been convicted. The Union Ministry of Home Affairs - which oversees the BSF - is responsible for this state of affairs. The largely police leadership of the ministry has convinced its political bosses that harsh action against erring personnel could affect the morale of the forces.
That this goes against the grain of the proclaimed official strategy of winning back the hearts and minds of the Kashmiris is ignored. Even when the BSF has been forced to act, the sentences have been too lenient to act as a deterrent.
In May 1990, a newly-married woman Mubina Gani was taken off a bus by BSF men on the Anantnag-Korenag road along with her maid. Both were raped. The case created a furore and the BSF’s attempts to hush it up failed. As a result of a court martial, two constables were sentenced to just five year’s imprisonment and dismissed from service, while two head constables punished with forfeiture of seniority and reduction in rank.
While the BSF shares the court-martial procedure with the army, it does not quite work that way. The army tends to take a tougher stand against soldiers charged with molestation and rape. Trials usually take place with exemplary speed and sentences can be harsh, up to 10 years imprisonment and cashiering from service - which is what happened to two army officers convicted of raping a Canadian nurse.
The BSF, on the other hand, goes out of its way to subvert the procedure and most personnel get away because of shoddy investigation and trial procedures. however, even the army has been reluctant to act in cases of custodial deaths (‘encounter’ killings) and ‘excessive force’ and mass killings (such as Bijbehara).
22 April 2002
21 April 2002
BSF record: Guilty are seldom punished
21 April 2002
The Times of India
BSF record: Guilty are seldom punished
Siddharth Varadarajan & Manoj Joshi
Times News Netwok
New Delhi: If the people of Kashmir are not reassured by union home minister L K Advani’s promise to punish the Border Security Force men accused of gang-raping a 17-year-old girl in Kullar village near Anantnag on Thursday, there’s a reason: Bijbehara.
Nine years after the BSF’s 74 battalion opened fire on a large crowd of unarmed protesters in this small Kashmiri town, killing 37 persons, not a single jawan or officer has been punished. The massacre took place on October 22, 1993.
After strong strictures passed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), 13 BSF men were charged with murder. But the subsequent General Security Force Court (GSFC) trial led to their acquittal. When the NHRC sought to examine the transcripts of the trials in order to satisfy itself that the BSF had made a genuine attempt to secure convictions, the Vajpayee government refused. The NHRC then moved the Supreme Court in an attempt to secure justice for the victims. And that is where the matter stands.
In the early 1990s, the BSF was charged with the execution of innocents and torture. But in not a single case have the persons concerned been convicted. The Union ministry of home affairs - which oversees the BSF - is responsible for this state of affairs. The largely police leadership of the ministry has convinced its political bosses that harsh action against erring personnel could affect the morale of the forces.
That this goes against the grain of the proclaimed official strategy of winning back the hearts and minds of the Kashmiris is ignored. Even when the BSF has been forced to act, the sentences have been too lenient to act as a deterrent.
In Mmay 1990, a newly-married woman was taken off a bus by BSF men on the Anantnag-Korenag road along with her maid. Both were raped. The case created a furore and the BSF’s attempts to hush it up failed. As a result of a court martial, two constables were sentenced to just five year’s imprisonment and dismissed from service, while two head constables punished with forfeiture of seniority and reduction in rank.
While the BSF shares the court-martial procedure with the army, it does not quite work that way. The army tends to take a tougher stand against soldiers charged with molestation and rape. Trials usually take place with exemplary speed and sentences can be harsh, up to 10 years imprisonment and cashiering from service - which is what happened to two army officers convicted of raping a Canadian nurse.
The BSF, on the other hand, goes out of its way to subvert the procedure and most personnel get away because of shoddy investigation and trial procedures. However, even the army has been relcutant to act in cases of custodial deaths (‘encounter’ killings) and ‘excessive force’ and mass killings (such as Bijbehara).
The Times of India
BSF record: Guilty are seldom punished
Siddharth Varadarajan & Manoj Joshi
Times News Netwok
New Delhi: If the people of Kashmir are not reassured by union home minister L K Advani’s promise to punish the Border Security Force men accused of gang-raping a 17-year-old girl in Kullar village near Anantnag on Thursday, there’s a reason: Bijbehara.
Nine years after the BSF’s 74 battalion opened fire on a large crowd of unarmed protesters in this small Kashmiri town, killing 37 persons, not a single jawan or officer has been punished. The massacre took place on October 22, 1993.
After strong strictures passed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), 13 BSF men were charged with murder. But the subsequent General Security Force Court (GSFC) trial led to their acquittal. When the NHRC sought to examine the transcripts of the trials in order to satisfy itself that the BSF had made a genuine attempt to secure convictions, the Vajpayee government refused. The NHRC then moved the Supreme Court in an attempt to secure justice for the victims. And that is where the matter stands.
In the early 1990s, the BSF was charged with the execution of innocents and torture. But in not a single case have the persons concerned been convicted. The Union ministry of home affairs - which oversees the BSF - is responsible for this state of affairs. The largely police leadership of the ministry has convinced its political bosses that harsh action against erring personnel could affect the morale of the forces.
That this goes against the grain of the proclaimed official strategy of winning back the hearts and minds of the Kashmiris is ignored. Even when the BSF has been forced to act, the sentences have been too lenient to act as a deterrent.
In Mmay 1990, a newly-married woman was taken off a bus by BSF men on the Anantnag-Korenag road along with her maid. Both were raped. The case created a furore and the BSF’s attempts to hush it up failed. As a result of a court martial, two constables were sentenced to just five year’s imprisonment and dismissed from service, while two head constables punished with forfeiture of seniority and reduction in rank.
While the BSF shares the court-martial procedure with the army, it does not quite work that way. The army tends to take a tougher stand against soldiers charged with molestation and rape. Trials usually take place with exemplary speed and sentences can be harsh, up to 10 years imprisonment and cashiering from service - which is what happened to two army officers convicted of raping a Canadian nurse.
The BSF, on the other hand, goes out of its way to subvert the procedure and most personnel get away because of shoddy investigation and trial procedures. However, even the army has been relcutant to act in cases of custodial deaths (‘encounter’ killings) and ‘excessive force’ and mass killings (such as Bijbehara).
20 April 2002
Why the U.K.'s report on Modi's riots worries Delhi
20 April 2002
The Times of India
Why UK’s report worries Delhi
SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi: The Vajpayee government is worried a scathing report on the Gujarat riots prepared by the British High Commission here might form the basis for British courts to indict chief minister Narendra Modi for ‘complicity’ in the killing of three British Muslims near Ahmedabad in early March — and possibly even genocide.
‘‘we presume the British government will fight any such move, just as it opposed the idea of extraditing Pinochet,’’ said an official, referring to the year-long legal battle by human rights activists to have the former Chilean dictator sent to Spain to face trial. ‘‘But if the victims’ family members move the courts in Britain, there is no telling what might happen’’.
British law allows for jurisdiction when crimes are committed against citizens overseas. and since a similar provision was explicitly introduced into the Indian statute book via the new Prevention of Terrorism Act, India would be hard put to invoke national sovereignty if a British court were to make an extradition request.
The Times of India has learned that at least two human rights organisations and several Indian lawyers in the UK are ‘‘actively examining’’ the possibility of moving the British courts against Modi and senior Gujarat officials for their alleged ‘‘role’’ in the killing. ‘‘Based on all that has emerged’’ said one London-based Indian lawyer, ‘‘a strong case can be made out on the complicity of the State’s leadership.’’ She said reports of senior Gujarat ministers taking over Police Control Rooms and preventing officers from saving lives ‘‘will help establish the chain of command right to the top’’.
What apparently has the Vajpayee government worried is that the British High Commission report also seems to support the charge that the riots were planned and that the police connived with the killers. Any British court which takes up the case is likely to subpoena the report and use it to put pressure on the Blair government. For the moment, the Blair government is handling the case gingerly. Its main concern seems to be securing adequate monetary compensation for its murdered citizens.
The Times of India
Why UK’s report worries Delhi
SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi: The Vajpayee government is worried a scathing report on the Gujarat riots prepared by the British High Commission here might form the basis for British courts to indict chief minister Narendra Modi for ‘complicity’ in the killing of three British Muslims near Ahmedabad in early March — and possibly even genocide.
‘‘we presume the British government will fight any such move, just as it opposed the idea of extraditing Pinochet,’’ said an official, referring to the year-long legal battle by human rights activists to have the former Chilean dictator sent to Spain to face trial. ‘‘But if the victims’ family members move the courts in Britain, there is no telling what might happen’’.
British law allows for jurisdiction when crimes are committed against citizens overseas. and since a similar provision was explicitly introduced into the Indian statute book via the new Prevention of Terrorism Act, India would be hard put to invoke national sovereignty if a British court were to make an extradition request.
The Times of India has learned that at least two human rights organisations and several Indian lawyers in the UK are ‘‘actively examining’’ the possibility of moving the British courts against Modi and senior Gujarat officials for their alleged ‘‘role’’ in the killing. ‘‘Based on all that has emerged’’ said one London-based Indian lawyer, ‘‘a strong case can be made out on the complicity of the State’s leadership.’’ She said reports of senior Gujarat ministers taking over Police Control Rooms and preventing officers from saving lives ‘‘will help establish the chain of command right to the top’’.
What apparently has the Vajpayee government worried is that the British High Commission report also seems to support the charge that the riots were planned and that the police connived with the killers. Any British court which takes up the case is likely to subpoena the report and use it to put pressure on the Blair government. For the moment, the Blair government is handling the case gingerly. Its main concern seems to be securing adequate monetary compensation for its murdered citizens.
18 April 2002
I salute you Geetaben, from the bottom of my heart
18 April 2002
The Times of India
The Mask is Off
A Tale of Two Hindus
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Two weeks ago, the resident editor of The Times of India in Ahmedabad sent our office in Delhi a photograph so shocking it made my stomach churn. Shocking not just for what it depicted but because, to paraphrase Barthes, "one was looking at it from inside our freedom." This was my India. This is my India.
On a hot and dusty patch of asphalt lies the naked body of a woman, Geetaben, her clothes stripped off and thrown carelessly near her. One piece of her underclothing lies a foot away from her body, the other is clutched desperately in her left hand. Her left arm is bloodied, as is her torso, which appears to have deep gashes. Her left thigh is covered in blood and she is wearing a small anklet. Her plastic chappals sit sadly alongside her lifeless body and in the middle of the photo frame is a gnarled, red, hate-filled remnant of a brick, perhaps the one her assailants used to deliver their final blow.
Geetaben was killed in Ahmedabad on March 25, in broad daylight, near a bus stop close to her home. She was a Hindu who in the eyes of the Hindu separatists currently ruling Gujarat had committed the cardinal sin of falling in love with a Muslim man. When the Sangh Parivar mobs came for him, she stood her ground long enough for him to flee. But the killers seemed more interested in her. She was dragged out, stripped naked and killed. No lethal dose of Zyklon-B delivered surreptitiously in a darkened, secluded chamber. Geetaben's murder was never meant to be a furtive, secret affair. The holocaust that Chief Minister Narendra Modi's administration presided over was engineered in the knowledge that the Indian state never punishes murderers with political connections. Delhi 1984, Bombay 1993, Gujarat 2002. Neither Congress, Third Front or BJP believes in Nurembergs.
In these troubled times, when heroes are scarce and villains abound, Geetaben deserves to be worshipped. She is Gujarat's Jhansi ki Rani, its La Passionaria. I salute you, Geetaben, from the bottom of my heart for your one brief moment of defiance. For, even in death, with your helpless, innocent body bloodied and your clothes ripped apart, you showed more courage, humanity and dignity and more fidelity to the Hindu religion than Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee has done in the past month. When the day of reckoning comes, no one will dare ask you where you were when Gujarat was burning. But when Yama waves a dossier at Mr Vajpayee and asks him how many lives he saved, what will he answer, I wonder. Will he hang his head in shame as he did at Shah-e-Alam camp in Ahmedabad? Or will he lecture the Hindu God of Death about Godhra and jehadi Muslims, and claim, as he did Wednesday, that if only Parliament had condemned the Sabarmati Express carnage, the genocide which followed would never have happened.
When I heard what Mr Vajpayee said at the BJP rally in Goa last week, I experienced the same contaminating, stomach-churning sensation of being present at a crime scene that I felt when I saw the photograph of Geetaben. Though the PM now insists he was misquoted, whichever way his words are parsed, what he told his party faithful at Goa was bone-chilling. "Wherever Muslims are," he said, painting a broad brush to describe not just the followers of Islam around the world but the one-fifth of India's citizens who happen to be Muslim, "they do not want to live with others peacefully."
At the best of times, such a statement would be unforgivable. But when you consider that he was talking about the killing of as many as 2,000 Muslims in Gujarat - and to an audience which believed this genocide was justified - one can only react in horror. Already, the Sangh is enforcing an economic boycott of Muslims. There is not a single Muslim business left in Gujarat. Photocopying stalls near Gujarati courts turn Muslim lawyers away. Men with beards are not served in restaurants and shops in the state. Muslim mothers pray their children won't call them ammi on the street. Instead of speaking out against this, Mr Vajpayee actually had the gall to say Muslims do not wish to live in peace.
For tens of millions of Indians, including those who might have flirted with the BJP, Mr Vajpayee's remarks have served as a wake-up call. At the Shah-e-Alam camp, he said the riots had shamed India. But what he said at Goa has shamed India even more.
For all his fulminations against jehad, Mr Vajpayee's ideology is equally jehadi. His party does not believe in people living in peace, in ensuring that the citizens of India - whether Hindu, Muslim or other - have the wherewithal to live as human beings. The BJP does not respect the rights of citizens or of the nation as a whole. Instead, a bogus, hollow ideology of 'Hindutva' has been erected to cover up their utter contempt for the rights of the people of India.
If historians use the phrase 'Muslim separatism' to define the struggle to carve out a Muslim nation from India in the last century, the project of the RSS-BJP could well be called 'Hindu' separatism. Separatism or secessionism is not just about the desire to create physical distance; it is as much about striving to distance oneself from the political, cultural and philosophical mores of the country. The BJP's separatist project poses as 'Hindu,' but it aims to secede from the philosophical and cultural foundations of India, including Hinduism, and from the political principles that Indians have evolved over the past 200 years of struggle for their rights.
The aim of this project is to establish a state where all Indians, including Hindus, will be devoid of rights except those which will be bestowed upon them as a privilege. Today, Mr Vajpayee tells Muslim, Christian and Sikh Indians at Goa that "we (i.e., the BJP) have allowed you freedom of worship." Tomorrow, Hindu Indians will be told what they are "allowed" to do. Those that transgress - like Geetaben, or Medha Patkar, journalists and others - will be dealt with. Gujarat has thrown a challenge to the country. The writing is on the wall. Either we stand up to defend the rights of all citizens; or we will all go down eventually.
The Times of India
The Mask is Off
A Tale of Two Hindus
By Siddharth Varadarajan
Two weeks ago, the resident editor of The Times of India in Ahmedabad sent our office in Delhi a photograph so shocking it made my stomach churn. Shocking not just for what it depicted but because, to paraphrase Barthes, "one was looking at it from inside our freedom." This was my India. This is my India.
On a hot and dusty patch of asphalt lies the naked body of a woman, Geetaben, her clothes stripped off and thrown carelessly near her. One piece of her underclothing lies a foot away from her body, the other is clutched desperately in her left hand. Her left arm is bloodied, as is her torso, which appears to have deep gashes. Her left thigh is covered in blood and she is wearing a small anklet. Her plastic chappals sit sadly alongside her lifeless body and in the middle of the photo frame is a gnarled, red, hate-filled remnant of a brick, perhaps the one her assailants used to deliver their final blow.
Geetaben was killed in Ahmedabad on March 25, in broad daylight, near a bus stop close to her home. She was a Hindu who in the eyes of the Hindu separatists currently ruling Gujarat had committed the cardinal sin of falling in love with a Muslim man. When the Sangh Parivar mobs came for him, she stood her ground long enough for him to flee. But the killers seemed more interested in her. She was dragged out, stripped naked and killed. No lethal dose of Zyklon-B delivered surreptitiously in a darkened, secluded chamber. Geetaben's murder was never meant to be a furtive, secret affair. The holocaust that Chief Minister Narendra Modi's administration presided over was engineered in the knowledge that the Indian state never punishes murderers with political connections. Delhi 1984, Bombay 1993, Gujarat 2002. Neither Congress, Third Front or BJP believes in Nurembergs.
In these troubled times, when heroes are scarce and villains abound, Geetaben deserves to be worshipped. She is Gujarat's Jhansi ki Rani, its La Passionaria. I salute you, Geetaben, from the bottom of my heart for your one brief moment of defiance. For, even in death, with your helpless, innocent body bloodied and your clothes ripped apart, you showed more courage, humanity and dignity and more fidelity to the Hindu religion than Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee has done in the past month. When the day of reckoning comes, no one will dare ask you where you were when Gujarat was burning. But when Yama waves a dossier at Mr Vajpayee and asks him how many lives he saved, what will he answer, I wonder. Will he hang his head in shame as he did at Shah-e-Alam camp in Ahmedabad? Or will he lecture the Hindu God of Death about Godhra and jehadi Muslims, and claim, as he did Wednesday, that if only Parliament had condemned the Sabarmati Express carnage, the genocide which followed would never have happened.
When I heard what Mr Vajpayee said at the BJP rally in Goa last week, I experienced the same contaminating, stomach-churning sensation of being present at a crime scene that I felt when I saw the photograph of Geetaben. Though the PM now insists he was misquoted, whichever way his words are parsed, what he told his party faithful at Goa was bone-chilling. "Wherever Muslims are," he said, painting a broad brush to describe not just the followers of Islam around the world but the one-fifth of India's citizens who happen to be Muslim, "they do not want to live with others peacefully."
At the best of times, such a statement would be unforgivable. But when you consider that he was talking about the killing of as many as 2,000 Muslims in Gujarat - and to an audience which believed this genocide was justified - one can only react in horror. Already, the Sangh is enforcing an economic boycott of Muslims. There is not a single Muslim business left in Gujarat. Photocopying stalls near Gujarati courts turn Muslim lawyers away. Men with beards are not served in restaurants and shops in the state. Muslim mothers pray their children won't call them ammi on the street. Instead of speaking out against this, Mr Vajpayee actually had the gall to say Muslims do not wish to live in peace.
For tens of millions of Indians, including those who might have flirted with the BJP, Mr Vajpayee's remarks have served as a wake-up call. At the Shah-e-Alam camp, he said the riots had shamed India. But what he said at Goa has shamed India even more.
For all his fulminations against jehad, Mr Vajpayee's ideology is equally jehadi. His party does not believe in people living in peace, in ensuring that the citizens of India - whether Hindu, Muslim or other - have the wherewithal to live as human beings. The BJP does not respect the rights of citizens or of the nation as a whole. Instead, a bogus, hollow ideology of 'Hindutva' has been erected to cover up their utter contempt for the rights of the people of India.
If historians use the phrase 'Muslim separatism' to define the struggle to carve out a Muslim nation from India in the last century, the project of the RSS-BJP could well be called 'Hindu' separatism. Separatism or secessionism is not just about the desire to create physical distance; it is as much about striving to distance oneself from the political, cultural and philosophical mores of the country. The BJP's separatist project poses as 'Hindu,' but it aims to secede from the philosophical and cultural foundations of India, including Hinduism, and from the political principles that Indians have evolved over the past 200 years of struggle for their rights.
The aim of this project is to establish a state where all Indians, including Hindus, will be devoid of rights except those which will be bestowed upon them as a privilege. Today, Mr Vajpayee tells Muslim, Christian and Sikh Indians at Goa that "we (i.e., the BJP) have allowed you freedom of worship." Tomorrow, Hindu Indians will be told what they are "allowed" to do. Those that transgress - like Geetaben, or Medha Patkar, journalists and others - will be dealt with. Gujarat has thrown a challenge to the country. The writing is on the wall. Either we stand up to defend the rights of all citizens; or we will all go down eventually.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
