Concerned Citizens Tribunal - Gujarat 2002
An inquiry into the carnage in Gujarat

Download / Print Report

Annexure 4



The Tribunal recorded 2,094 oral and written statements in the fortnight-long sittings. While major issues that arose out of the data contained in the data have reflected in the analysis, it is possible that some disparities show up since the teams that gathered and processed the data were not professionals.

Data Collection

Areas most acutely affected by the violence were identified and sittings then scheduled. Public announcements of the sittings were made in advance. At least two Judges were present from the eight member Tribunal when the most critical areas and sites were visited.

Statements were taken voluntarily. In many cases, Hindu representation from affected areas was sought by members of the Tribunal. The witnesses deposed as direct depositions before members of the Tribunal and the convenors and volunteers recorded written statements. The testimonies were not time bound, as a result of which the spontaneity has been preserved. While 94.5 per cent of the testimonies were from Muslim survivor victims, 5.5 per cent were from Hindus from the same affected areas or from neighbouring localities.

A broadly similar format was used though this was not rigid to affect uniformity. (see Form, Detailed Annexures, Volume III)

Cause of Riots

This was ascertained from the data collected in the forms through multiple codes. The idea was to ascertain what different kinds of causes, or what sort of similarity existed. Hence details of slogans raised by the mob during assault and any other details about the persons shouting slogans were a category. To emerge at an understanding of whether or not there was a conspiracy or not, details were sought about whether to not any group meeting had taken place before the attack. Thereafter to ascertain more details a question was also raised about why addressed the group, the venue for the meeting, the spread of a rumour before the attack, the geographical area from where the rumour spread, the precautions had taken after rumours spread etc.

Effect of the Violence

Loss to person

To arrive at some understanding of the extent of losses suffered, extensive details on this were sought from the data fields on the form. Here details of attack on the place of dwelling (Residence) in terms of the date, time and place were sought apart from the details of the attack itself. Details were sought also on damages to other residences and properties in the locality that the deponent had knowledge of.

Details regarding dead persons: apart from the name and age and details of the accused the Cause of death was sought to be ascertained (1) Due to sharp cutting weapon, (2) By burning, (3) Private Firing, (4) Any other reasons. The details from the evidence regarding the post-mortem report, FIR—whether it had been filed or not; the, the names of witnesses were also sought.

Details of gender crimes were sought as also the police response to each one of these in respect of response at the time of the crime itself, registration of offences, naming complainants and arresting the guilty.

Loss of Life, Threat to Life, Damage to property.

Details of the kind of destruction were also solicited.

Loss to family/known

Known applies to known accused from the area. Livelihood lost, education disrupted, Physical and mental trauma, earning member dislocated, migration were some of the field in which information was sought.

The kind and extent of damage to the community details were sought as also details of the attack if there was more than one.

Patterns of Violence

This was a valid determinant and visible patterns emerged. The data collection revolved around how many people were involved, whether they carried weapons, were they local people or outsiders. The materials that they carried for attack were also detailed in fields for the respondent like kerosene, petrol, and gas cylinders, any other.

The Guilty

Specific data was sought on whether or not any political person is involved in the attack and other details of other attackers were sought too.

Law and Order

Police —a) whether police was present at the time of offence, b) inaction; Details of information if given to the police regarding the attack; c) police responsibility: After how much time of giving information police reached the place and What steps were taken by the police?

Fire Brigade: a) whether fire brigade was informed; b) After how much time of informing fire brigade arrived.

Administration: a) Details of help if sought from any Govt. officer

Medical Aid: did this arrive in time and was it adequate?

Relief/ Rehabilitation

Details of compensation received were also sought from the deponents compared to their loss of damage.

The Tribunal collected it’s own data on these lines. In addition, other detailed statistical analyses of over 4,000 forms published was carried out. This analysis has been carried out by Citizens for Justice and Peace, Citizens Initiative and Federation for Civil Liberties


Published by: Citizens for Justice and Peace