*  <http://www.countercurrents.org/print.html>*

*Marauding Mourners*

*By Amrit Dhatt*

06 June, 2008
*Combat 
Law<http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=1163&issue_id=40>
*


*I*n sharp contrast to India's projected image of the world's biggest
democracy is India's human rights record. The Anti-Sikh riots of 1984 are
perhaps one of the India's most appalling moments, and the legacies of those
events continue to live within the public consciousness 24 years later. On
October 31 1984, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was shot dead by her two
bodyguards. The two had taken revenge against her for ordering the army to
attack the holiest shrine of Sikhs, the Golden Temple in Amritsar; it was an
anti-insurgency operation five months earlier in Punjab, killing many
innocent pilgrims.

This was the first time in the young nation's history that a serving prime
minister was killed. The fact that the assassination was attached to the
prolonged insurgency in Punjab and that the two assassins of Indira Gandhi
were Sikhs created a kind of vehemence that grew like an ominous cloud over
Sikhs, a minority community, counting only two percent of India's total
population. It led to a devastating crisis that can only be called genocide
of the Sikh minority in Delhi and other cities. In the days following the
assassination, politically motivated violence was spread across and
thousands of Sikhs were massacred by frenzied mobs. In Delhi it continued
for at least 72 hours.

The massacre was actively encouraged by Congress leaders and then executed
with the complicity of the police, write Manoj Mitta and HS Phoolka in the
book. Instead of upholding law and order, the police were hounding the
victims, particularly in those areas where the poorest Sikhs lived, say the
authors. The riots of 1984 were a multifaceted tragedy. The massacre, left
widows and orphans to face a society where the vulnerable are preyed upon by
the powerful. It also revealed the sad state of India's professed democracy.
High-ranking politicians that masqueraded the mobs as mourners were actually
providing justification for the violence that took place. The carnage of
Sikhs in Delhi in 1984 exposed that while India has one of the world's
finest constitutions and has the military muscles to avert such a
catastrophe, it's leaders were complicit in this mass murder. It is
essentially a negation of the concept of the Indian nation.

In When a Tree Shook Delhi, authors Mitta and Phoolka fearlessly expose the
reality of the state's rule of law and supposed commitment to the principles
of justice. This book clearly outlines the mechanisms through which a
systematic, planned genocide of a minority community took place in the
nation's capital. The authors are voices of authority on the subject, and
reveal the patterns that allowed mobs to massacre Sikhs within a climate of
impunity. The title of the book comes from the infamous words of Rajiv
Gandhi shortly after the riots took place. As a justification for the riots,
Rajiv Gandhi said, "…when a mighty tree falls, it is only natural for the
earth around to shake a little." Mitta and Phoolka use this justification to
set the theme of the book, which is essentially a reality check. The authors
also highlight Manmohan Singh's public apology in 2005, when he claimed
that, "We still do not know the truth." As if this collaboration was a
response to Prime Minister Singh's comments, the authors make uncovering the
truth their agenda. In the end, the authors confirm our worst suspicions
that such organised killing of Sikhs was indeed preventable. This book is
relevant as an example of an opposing argument to the rhetoric of democracy
and growth that goes with the official image of contemporary India. The
public imagination can be neglectful and that makes When a Tree Shook Delhi
important for it reminds people what can happen when communalism and
disregard for human life takes away better of them.

This book is divided into two parts: a journalistic account written mainly
by Mitta, a senior editor with The Times of India, and a personal account of
Phoolka, a lawyer who spearheaded the campaign for justice for the victims
of the carnage. The combination of human stories with journalistic-style
reporting brings together details that create a lasting impact upon the
reader.

For instance, there is a chapter on rape, an integral part of the riots that
has been largely ignored because of the social taboos surrounding it. Here,
the issue of rape is tackled head on. Phoolka begins with the story of his
personal struggle to save not only his own life but also that of his
pregnant wife, as he was a visible Sikh in New Delhi during the time of the
riots; he then branches off into a chronological account of all of the legal
proceedings including the small victories and devastating blows the victims
of the riots endured during their fight for justice. Phoolka's voice is
evocative and it gives readers a human connection that makes the legal
battles all the more real. For instance, Phoolka says, "At a personal level,
the unanimous backing in December 1999 for a fresh inquiry into the 1984
carnage came as a vindication of the often lonely and frustrating struggle
we had to wage over the years to bring the guilty to book"(191).

A shortcoming of this book is its lack of further analysis of a compelling
argument that the authors themselves raise. Through the testimony of a
witness, it is revealed that there was the possibility of the mob being
financially compensated for killing Sikhs. That having been said demolishes
the argument that the mobs acted out of grief. So rather being an act of
mourning, the riots were acts of calculated bloodshed. Moreover, the authors
also mention that the sentiments of the mobs did not show signs of grief.
The social phenomenon of "mob mentality" could have been employed by the
authors to shed some light on how such senseless violence grew out of
control. To many, the events that occurred in India's capital during those
three days is still incomprehensible and further development of this
argument could have shed some light.

It is important to commend the work of Mitta and Phoolka, but it is also
important to question why it has taken almost a quarter of a century for
such a dialogue to be brought in public domain through a comprehensive book.
This is a single book that has been written on a crime against humanity. The
Indian government has largely ignored this blatant violation of human rights
and it gives the impression that the only people to be affected were the
victims. The rest of society went on with business as usual. How can the
rule of law, justice and democracy take roots in a society where such a
thing could occur? While it is important to acknowledge the small victories
achieved by Phoolka for the victims of the carnage, it is equally important
to remember that it has taken a deplorable amount of time for the courts to
provide a minimal compensation package to the victims.

It is also important to recognise that the massacre of Sikhs in 1984 was not
an isolated incident of politically motivated violence. There have been
episodes of violence against other minority communities including Muslims
and Christians. The failing memory of the Indian collective consciousness is
astonishing whilst minority and susceptible communities are persecuted and
victimised as a matter of practice rather than exception. Whether it is the
anti-Sikh riots of 1984 or the Gujarat riots of 2002, painful memories of
India's contemporary history are tucked away into obscure areas of the
public consciousness while history repeats itself. Even during times of
peace and in relatively conflict-free zones, there is violence against
vulnerable communities such as women and Dalits.

The violence against minority groups and vulnerable communities in India is
an insightful commentary on what kind of value and principles lie under the
façade of Indian democracy. While Prime Minister Manmohan Singh formally
apologised for the riots, one must question whether the symbolic show of
shame and remorse is sufficient. Is it simply enough to verbalise it in a
public manner 20 years after the fact? Moreover, it took a Sikh prime
minister to do so. There is a large divide between the State's symbolic
displays of respect for human rights principles and the reality that is
experienced on the ground. Until that divide is greatly reduced, collective
amnesia combined with a climate of lawlessness will continue to afflict and
divide.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to