Offstumped – Commentary on Indian Politics

Originally published in The Pioneer. Rajdeep Sardesai’s Column can be found on Hindustan Times and on First Post

In an article that appeared in a leading English daily, Mr Rajdeep Sardesai of CNN-IBN had some unsolicited but indirect advice for Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. He asked the Chief Minister to “try a little kindness”. Mr Sardesai went on to make a sweeping generalisation, claiming a “complete absence of remorse or any sense of compassion” on Mr Modi’s part. The crux of Mr Sardesai’s argument was that “high growth without the human touch can never really achieve true reconciliation between communities”.

As touching as Mr Sardesai’s prose is, his article is symptomatic of a broader phenomenon that has come to colour all commentary on the 2002 Gujarat riots building on the false straw-man of a heartless and callous state versus the weak and hapless victim who has been wronged by it.

In this context it would be instructive to take a slight detour to 1999 and the experiences of Poland in dealing with past crimes by Polish collaborators of the East German Stasi secret police. In a twin book review that appeared in the Cambridge Quarterly in 1999, Piotr Kuhiwczak raises a rather unusual question that one hardly expects from a victim: Was the prosecution of past crimes about justice or retribution?

If we were to apply Mr Kuhiwczak’s analysis of the Polish experience to the Indian context around the post-Godhra violence in Gujarat, the following questions would arise:

• How do we reappraise the past while avoiding the temptation for retribution?
• How do we ensure that the reconciliation process maintains a balance between intense emotions and cold facts?
• How do we become aware of what is dominating through the reconciliation process — one’s heart or one’s head?
• How do we ensure we establish the truth before passing judgement?

All of the above questions are critical for a meaningful process of reconciliation that ensures justice while not falling into the trap for retribution.

Unfortunately the public discourse in the media and the activism of certain NGOs over the 2002 Gujarat violence has been more about retribution against one individual than about justice for the many with truth becoming the casualty.

When activists make sweeping claims that no justice has been delivered on the 2002 violence they obscure the truth on the many convictions that have already happened, including life imprisonments. This is a fact alluded to by Mr Modi himself during his questioning by the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team.

When the media paints a narrative of a flawed process of justice in Gujarat, it distorts the truth that even before there was a Supreme Court-appointed SIT, not just courts outside Gujarat but also courts in Gujarat had delivered life imprisonments. When the victims rightfully point out to failures of the police to protect, their emotions cloud the truth around many instances where the police did act during the riots — another fact that becomes evident as one reviews the many news reports from that fateful day as well as from Mr Modi’s replies to the SIT.

The many hundred deaths of those shameful acts of violence clearly point to the fact that the police action was just simply not enough. The scale of violence and the immense pain resulting from it, however, must not cloud our judgement on the conduct of those in office without a truthful accounting of the facts. The facts on why the bodies were shifted from Godhra to Ahmedabad, facts on how many towns saw curfew during the day on February 28, the deployment of the BSF, the request for Army even before nightfall, the flag marches the next day and the police action all through must be accounted for truthfully.

True, there needs to be a genuine closure on the 2002 violence, but the sweeping claims of Mr Modi’s critics on why there cannot be closure are at odds with facts. When they speak of an absence of remorse they gloss over the truth on Mr Modi’s speech to the Gujarat Assembly in 2002, an interview to Aaj Tak in 2005. Nobody has been convicted in Naroda because that case and several others have been litigated for nine long years in the Supreme Court since 2003. Justice has been elusive in those cases because the process of justice got subverted into a mission to establish a political conspiracy with the intention of seeking retribution.

Mr Modi’s critics are right that ultimately this is about kindness and compassion for genuine closure. But kindness and compassion cannot be found in an atmosphere where the pursuit of retribution has perverted the process of justice. Kindness and compassion will not be found in an environment where the establishment of a political conspiracy comes at the expense of the truth.

Truth is the bulwark of justice and a necessary pre-condition for reconciliation.

The truth of 2002 is hundreds died. The truth of 2002 also is that the scale of violence overwhelmed a rickety law and order infrastructure in a manner no different from every other major riot in India. Underlying the autopsy of every riot is a story of systemic reforms not undertaken for decades as was brilliantly revealed in the Srikrishna Commission Report on the 1993 riots.

The Truth of 2002 is there was no political conspiracy or orchestration by the Chief Minister.

Recognition of this truth will hopefully advance the process of justice later this month in one trial court. A larger recognition of this truth within our public discourse will make this less about retribution and more about justice. It will create an environment that Mr Modi’s critics speak of in which kindness and compassion are no longer held hostage by conspiracy theorists, thus leading to lasting reconciliation and closure.

Filed under: Narendra Modi