By Swapan Dasgupta
It is extremely unlikely that the Supreme
Court-appointed Special Investigation Team’s “closure report” to the Ahmedabad
Magistrate’s Court on the plea to prosecute Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra
Modi for the 2002 riots will be the last word on the subject. If the past is
any indication, the determined band of ambulance chasers that have lived off
the misery of the unfortunate Muslim victims of the post-Godhra violence will
avail of every legal trick in the book to keep the issue alive. The chance of
the activists getting their way and getting a FIR registered against Modi may
be very slim. However, that is not going to stop them from keeping the issue
alive in court on one plea or another.
The important thing to remember is that no court,
including the Supreme Court, has, after a decade of relentless litigation found
anything to implicate Modi personally in the killings. Yes, there have been
strictures, such as the latest one by the Gujarat High Court, against the
administration for its sins of omission. In a way that is right because the
mere fact that widespread riots did happen in the aftermath of the arson attack
on the Sabarmati Express constitutes an indictment of the state government.
However, there is a big difference between a state’s failure to protect the
lives and property of citizens and the suggestion that the administration—from
the Chief Minister and Police chief down to the local thanedar—was guilty of a
criminal conspiracy to teach Muslims a lesson.
The difference matters life. For the Government’s
overall failure to stop the killings citizens can react in two ways. First, they
can pressure the administration to ensure that all the perpetrators of violence
are identified and prosecuted. This has happened in the case of the Best Bakery
case and a few others. Secondly, citizens and political parties have the right
to take any failure of the administration to the arena of competitive politics.
This too has happened. The riots dominated the agenda of the 2002 state Assembly
election and were an undercurrent in the 2007 poll. On both occasions, Modi got
a resounding endorsement from the highest court of democracy.
Indeed, it was the realisation that the Congress
lacked the leadership and ability to outplay Modi in the electoral arena that
triggered the attempt to defeat him through the courts. It is quite clear that
the activists who have dogged Modi’s footsteps aren’t terribly interested in
punishing members of the mob that attacked Gulbarg Housing Society and killing
Ehsan Jaffri. That aspect of the case appears to have been conveniently
forgotten. They want to somehow establish that Jaffri’s killing was the
consequence of an order given by the Chief Minister. To achieve this end they
have used every trick in the book, including getting a police officer to depose
an imaginary accounts of a meeting—what the SIT report has diplomatically
dubbed an “afterthought.” They have even undertaken a campaign of vilification
against SIT members, calling into question their impartiality.
The activists’ initiatives may not have achieved the
end goal but there is little doubt that they have had an effect. For a start,
the preoccupation with Modi’s personal culpability has influenced the powerful
liberal establishment, both in India and overseas, and cast the Chief Minister
as an ogre. This in turn has diverted attention from the fact that there has
been no recurrence of communal rioting in Gujarat since 2002. The past decade
in Gujarat has been one of peace and very rapid economic development. In the
sphere of governance, Modi’s achievements have been colossal. The people of
Gujarat have long forgotten the riots—and don’t want to be reminded of them,
something even the local Congress understands—but thanks to the activists the
state has been portrayed as a laboratory of intolerance and regressive thought.
As astute politician, Modi has managed to use this needless vilification to
drum up regional pride. Yet, thanks to the demonology that has been constructed
neither Modi nor Gujarat has got the necessary credit for a decade of exemplary
growth.
Will this change after Modi has crossed yet another
hurdle? The answer depends not merely on how Gujarat votes at the end of 2012.
The real reason why Modi is being targeted isn’t because he is a regional boss
of a national party. His detractors are reconciled to him playing a long
innings in the state. Their fear—and I guess this is a fear shared by some BJP
leaders as well—is that Modi is now for all practical purposes a national
leader. If the legal assault on Modi loses momentum, nothing will stand in the
way of Modi shifting his gaze to national politics where he is certain to be an
inspirational figure, capable of mobilising a substantial section of the
electorate exasperated by the dullness and cynicism of existing leaders.
I have little or no doubt in my mind that Modi’s
popularity will exceed the present level of support for the BJP. He will
galvanise a large section of those who have hitherto stayed out of politics and
who regard electoral democracy as a cesspool. Modi will be the most formidable
opposition to the UPA nationally. A Gandhi-Modi contest in 2014 will be
absolutely riveting.
Sunday Pioneer, February 12, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment