|
CJP |
|
|
CJP |
|
 |
|
Gujarat Riots |
Crime Against Humanity
|
Reproduced below is the English translation of the editorial in the Urdu daily Inquilab (Mumbai) on November 5Zahira’s assaultThat Zahira has chosen to change her statement yet again gives rise to several questions. For example, could it be that the perpetrators of the Gujarat carnage who are still trying very hard to escape the long arm of the law are continuing to intimidate witnesses? Or are they trying different tactics to lure the family? Zahira Shaikh is neither an ignorant child nor is there any sign of her having lost her mental balance. It is evident that she is fully in her senses while saying whatever she is. Quite possibly, she is also being mindful of where her ‘real interests’ lie. In view of this, the fact that she has changed her statement yet again, or gone back on her earlier statement, can only mean that she has received fresh threats or a deal in which she sees great benefit for herself.
Readers will recall that the Best Bakery case is not only among the most gruesome incidents of the Gujarat carnage, it is also among those in which every possible effort has been made to hide the truth. When some human rights groups (e.g., Teesta Setalvad, against whom Zahira has now leveled very serious charges, and about whom later) extended to her their support and encouraged her to speak the truth without any fear, the Supreme Court delivered a milestone judgment that the case be transferred to Maharashtra for a retrial since the situation in Gujarat was such that the victims had no hope of getting justice there.
It may also be recalled that the strong words used by the apex court in castigating the Gujarat administration and the lower courts had reassured millions of peace-loving people within India and abroad and renewed the hope that the Gujarat victims would get justice. If despite this unprecedented and extraordinary court ruling the victims themselves start changing their statements, the fate of the justice process can well be imagined. While delivering justice to the victims, the court also pronounces punishments for the perpetrators. The judicial process even grants to the victim the right not to seek justice. But in exercising such right, besides giving aid to the perpetrators and encouraging further misdeeds, the victim also throttles the process of justice. Perhaps Zahira does not realise the far and wide-ranging implications of her retraction and the number of people she could be harming in the process.
As far as the allegations against Teesta Setalvad are concerned, we see no truth in them because whatever she is doing can not be for her personal benefit. She is the daughter of a top lawyer, but she is herself not a lawyer who could be charged with trying to corner major cases relating to the Gujarat carnage in order to extract large sums of money from clients. She is part of a voluntary organisation (Citizens for Justice and Peace) and it may be argued that she is trying to raise money for her NGO through her activities. But even this argument is difficult to digest because there are any number of fruitful activities for NGOs to undertake. Why would Teesta choose Gujarat of all places as her field of activity unless she has a certain kind of commitment? Above all, the question arises as to why any person should endanger her own life? Ask yourself if it is easy for anyone to extend support, not merely in words but through deed, to Zahira Shaikh or any other Gujarat victim? For, does not taking such a stand mean making enemies of individuals responsible for criminal deeds, such as Madhu Srivastava who is implicated in the Best Bakery case and chief minister Narendra Modi himself? Teesta Setalvad is co-editor of Communalism Combat, which has been fighting a relentless battle against communalism for the last 11 years. The journal’s special report Genocide, Gujarat 2002 (CC, April 2002) has the status of a solid document with elaborate details on the killings, destruction of property, estimate of losses and much more. Even a cursory glance at the publication would give you an idea of the painstaking labour without which it would be impossible to bring out such a report. It is conceivable that on occasion Teesta may have frightened Zahira or coerced her only to keep her away from certain elements attempting to offer inducements or issuing threats to Zahira. But it is inconceivable to attribute any other motive to this. By her retraction and attempt to malign a courageous human rights champion like Teesta, Zahira is damaging her own credibility. In so doing, she is only acting as an instrument of people who want to prevent her from speaking the truth and an activist like Teesta from fighting for any cause. It is certain that behind this conspiracy against Teesta are those who, deeply agitated by the prospects of a free and fair trial of the Gujarat cases and of the exposure of the Gujarat government’s role in the process, are attempting to demoralise those who have dared enter the public arena in the battle for justice and truth. Zahira is not only a victim, she is also innocent. She probably does not even realise that she is being used as an instrument. . |
