IB must answer some hard questions regarding Ishrat Jahan "revelation":
Statement
 Submitted by admin <http://twocircles.net/user/admin> on 14 June 2013 -
8:09pm

   - Crime/Terrorism <http://twocircles.net/news/crime-terrorism>
   - India News <http://twocircles.net/news/india-news>
   - Indian Muslim <http://twocircles.net/news/indian-muslim>


http://twocircles.net/2013jun14/ib_must_answer_some_hard_questions_regarding_ishrat_jahan_revelation_statement.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Twocirclesnet-IndianMuslim+%28TwoCircles.net+-+Indian+Muslim+News%29

By TCN News

New Delhi: Headlines Today broadcast yesterday what it claimed to be
telephone conversations that shows that Ishran Jahan was indeed involved in
an assassination attempt on Narendra Modi. A statement issued today by a
group of activists and journalists questioned the timing of this
"revelation" that has not been authenticated.

Ishrat Jahan, along with three other men, was killed on June 15, 2004 in a
fake encounter near Ahmadabad. Questions have been raised and an inquiry by
Metropolitan Judge SP Tamang concluded in 2009 that it was a case of
custodial killing.

*Full Statement:*

*IB’s desperate and dirty tricks to scuttle the Ishrat Jahan investigation*

It is a clear indication of the desperation being felt by the IB
establishment as the heat turns on its senior officers in the Ishrat Jahan
probe, that they are down to doing what they do best: use pliant sections
of the media to plant stories to deflect scrutiny and create a favourable
public mood. Following the summons issued to IB Special Director Rajender
Kumar by the CBI (which is probing the case on the direction of the Gujarat
High Court), the IB Director first sought to sell the familiar old story of
‘investigation will hit the morale of the IB’ – it seems as though a
blanket immunity from any scrutiny and accountability is the only guarantee
of IB morale. The IB then ran complaining to the Prime Minister; and when
nothing worked, it used the agency’s tried and tested trick of enlisting
the support of discredited ‘journalists’.

The 24-hour news channel Headlines Today aired tapes of telephone
conversations between alleged key operatives involved in the supposed
assassination plot to eliminate Narendra Modi. Suggestions have also been
made in a story in the Firstpost that the interrogation by the U.S. Federal
Bureau of Investigation of David Headley has revealed Ishrat Jahan’s active
involvement with the Lashkar e-Toiba.

Timing of the Telecast:

The tapes were aired less than 24 hours before a court hearing was
scheduled in the Ishrat Jahan Case. The mischievous intent of the leaks and
the telecast became clear when the Additional Advocate General of Gujarat
Tushar Mehta arrived in the court with the two CDs and insisted that the
court see these CDs, which according to him, would prove that the course of
CBI investigation was wrong. The Court refused to place these CDs on
record, asking the AG to hand this over to the relevant agency. The attempt
was to undercut the investigation probing the conspiracy hatched by the
officers of Crime Branch in eliminating Ishrat and three others by somehow
tainting them with the terror tag. The Court put it in perspective,
reminding the AG that no one could be killed in cold blood – and indeed
that is what the CBI was investigating.

More than resolving issues, these so-called revelations have in fact raised
more questions:

- Why are these tapes leaked to the press selectively now –when
investigators are closing in on Rajender Kumar?

- Why have these tapes not been placed before magistrate Tamang whose
enquiry in 2009 concluded that Ishrat and others were killed in cold blood?

- Why were the tapes not placed before the SIT in 2011, which similarly
reached the conclusion that the encounter had been staged?

- Did the IB provide any inputs to the Maharashtra government that local
modules of Lashkar were residing in the state?

- Given that telephone transcripts are said to be referring to four other
targets apart from Narendra Modi, with how many states and agencies did IB
share the inputs?

- What are the exact dates when these telephone calls were recorded?

- How do we believe that the ‘sasural’ being referred to in the telephone
conversations means Ishrat’s home, given that there is no reference to
Ishrat, or even to a woman operative?

- How many times did Rajender Kumar meet with Ahmedabad Commissioner of
Police, Kaushik, apart from once ‘orally’ informing about the intelligence
lead?

- Has the IB seen the NIA interrogation report of the terrorist double
agent David Headley? It makes no reference to any Ishrat Jahan.

- Did Rajender Kumar have a premonition about Headley who was interrogated
in 2010, when he was ‘orally’ conveying the intelligence inputs to
Ahmedabad Commissioner of Police in 2004?

- How are FBI reports being cited by everyone from IB chief to sundry
‘investigative journalists’ given that former Minister of Home Affairs had
said that the US had been less than willing to share information on Headley
with India?

One could ask several questions of the media too which chooses to air
telephone calls without any forensic tests or voice tests, asking us simply
to believe them because ‘they have been working on the story”. One could
tell them that being the IB’s chosen one for their dirty tricks is not
something to be particularly proud of. One could tell them also that the
business of investigative journalism demands that you be critical and
cynical of letters that IB chiefs write –and then leak at very crucial
stage of investigation. And most of all, one could also ask them to refrain
from grandly declaring telephone tapes as “Ishrat Jahan terror tapes”,
especially if she is neither a caller nor being referred to in those tapes.
But since there is no point in talking of ethics to those who compromise
knowingly, we shall not.

However, the IB must answer all these questions. It cannot hide behind its
flagging morale and continue to remain unaccountable to the Indian people.
It cannot pretend to be above the law of the land? Why is it fighting off
any investigation, trying to scuttle the interrogation of the Special
Director IB?

Sd/-

Shabnam Hashmi (ANHAD), Manisha Sethi, Ahmed Sohaib, Sanghamitra Misra and
Ambarien Alqadar (JTSA), Mansi Sharma (Activist), Mahtab Alam (Activist),
Ajit Sahi (Journalist), Sukumar Muralidharan (Journalist), Amit Sengupta
(journalist), Jawed Naqvi (journalist), Azam Khan (Activist), Kavita
Srivastav (PUCL), Harsh Mander (writer and activist), Sheba George
(Activist), Syed Zafar Mehdi (Journalist/ blogger), Anuradha Chenoy
(Academic), Harsh Kapoor (Activist), Vineet Tiwari (Activist), Sandeep
Singh (AISA), Bhasha (Journalist), Navaid Hamid (NIC) and many others

Released on 14th June 2013


-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to