[sacw] on Wadhwa Commission report (Op-ed, The Hindu)

[Harsh Kapoor]

FYI
Harsh Kapoor
----------------------------
The Hindu
Saturday, September 11, 1999
Op-Ed.

The Wadhwa Commission report
By Walter Fernandes

THE CRIMINALS waited for less than a month, after the submission of the
Wadhwa Commission report, to strike again. A Muslim trader and a Catholic
priest have been murdered in a less than 30-km radius of the site of the
Staines killings. Even the Orissa Government has acknowledged Dara Singh's
involvement in the murder of the former and does not rule it out in the
latter. But the Wadhwa Commission upheld the myth that no organisation was
involved in the Staines murder. Has this stance encouraged the recent
killings?
For years, attempts have been made to cover up such crimes, thus
encouraging the criminals. Soon after the Staines killings, three Union
Ministers spent less than an hour at the murder site, without knowing the
local dialect, and declared the crime a ``foreign conspiracy.'' Even before
appointing the Wadhwa Commission, the Union Home Minister, Mr. L. K.
Advani, had exonerated the Bajrang Dal. If they were so certain, why did
they need a Commission at all? Why did they not take action against the
``foreign hand?'' Or, did they want a Commission only to repeat the
platitudes they were mouthing?
If that is what they wanted, the Wadhwa Commission has played its role
well. Ignoring the evidence of its own counsel and investigation team, it
exonerated every organisation. The counsel's report provides circumstantial
evidence of Dara Singh's links with the Sangh Parivar. In seven First
Information Reports (FIRs) on communal crimes, Dara Singh is linked to the
Bajrang Dal and in four to the BJP. It states that he worked for the BJP in
1998, that he was active in the Goraksha Samiti and attacked Muslim cattle
traders. Eyewitnesses testify that the murderous crowd shouted ``Jai
Bajrang Bali'' and dispersed when a whistle was blown - an act known to be
the slogan and strategy of a communal organisation. Even the draft refers
to the counsel's evidence. But the final report absolves all organisations.
So with no organisational support Dara Singh got information about the
whereabouts of Graham Staines and motivated 50 persons to go to a village
far from theirs to burn the Australian missionary and his two children to
death.
Also the Commission's way of identifying issues raises doubts about the
forces at work. Many wanted the Commission to study the Staines murder in
the overall communal context. At least 108 attacks on Christians were
recorded in Gujarat alone during 1998. The year ended with tension in
Karnataka. There was a major incident in Orissa just when the Commission
was beginning its hearings. It had the authority to study the murder within
this context. Clause B of its terms of reference asked the Commission to
inquire whether any organisation was involved. Clause C gave it the power
to study related issues.
The Commission could have used this clause had it wanted to, but it did
not. People with a vested interest in fomenting communal tension had blamed
the Staines murder on conversions. Amid the violence in Gujarat and
elsewhere, the Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee, demanded a debate
on conversions, not on the acts of the criminals behind the attacks. The
Commission used Clause C to discuss conversions. Under Clause B, it
discussed the Sangh Parivar. It exonerated both but did not situate the
murder in the overall national context.
In so doing, the Commission played into the hands of those who use the
conversion myth to divert attention from their crimes. Such diversion is an
integral part of our national ethos. Whenever there is unrest against
corruption or social injustice, those involved in the protest are declared
naxalites and at times killed in pseudo-encounters. But those who burn
innocent people to death go scot-free. Conversion has become one such
convenient scapegoat. Finding scapegoat is not confined to any one party as
the inaction of the Orissa Government shows. It has filed FIRs against Dara
Singh but has not arrested him or declared him an absconder. He is free to
go around burning people or instigating others to do so on the pretext of
opposing conversions. Little wonder then that there were two murders within
a fortnight.
After the murder of the Roman Catholic priest, Fr. Arul Doss, the Home
Secretary of Orissa said Christians divided families and caused tension by
converting people. In this thinking murders are understandable and may even
be justified. The administrators are paid from the taxpayer's money to be
impartial executives. But they understand only murderers, not the import of
their irresponsible statements. They seem to ignore the fact that the
proportion of Christians declined from 2.6 per cent in 1961 to 2.3 per cent
in 1991. Then how do they explain mass conversions? They do not have to
know the truth but only need scapegoats to divert attention from their
inaction.
Thus the Wadhwa report is not the main issue. It brings into focus the
very credibility of inquiry Commissions. Some of their doctored reports
seem to encourage criminals. Was the BJP Government sincere in appointing
it? And if it was, why did it appoint a Commission only when a foreigner
was murdered and when there was a danger of international opinion going
against it?
Similar questions can be asked about many other Commissions appointed
after police firings, communal massacres or train accidents. Most of them
present what look like doctored reports. The Commission which probed the
police firing in Banjhi, Bihar, in which 15 tribals were killed in April
1985, accepted the police version and exonerated the state though evidence
pointed in the opposite direction. Look at the reports of the Commissions
on the frequent railway accidents. Their reports are accepted when they
give the official version, but their recommendations are ignored. See how
long it took to initiate action against the small-timers mentioned in the
Mishra Commission Report on the massacre of Sikhs. The big fish swim free.
If a Commission does a good job, its report is usually rejected. The
Srikrishna Commission report pinpointed responsibility and identified
persons behind the carnage of Muslims in 1993. The Maharashtra Government
rejected the report. The Commission on the Khanna train accident in Punjab
in 1998 also fixed the blame. Instead of implementing its recommendations,
another Commission was appointed. It is yet to begin its work.
The criminals know where to go from here. They have shown it through two
more murders in Orissa. But where does the honest citizen go? Do we throw
up our hands and let the criminals have their way or come forward, be
counted and demand justice to the victims? In so doing, it is important to
situate these murders within the context of the growth of fascism.
Criminalisation and communalisation are basic to it. So these crimes are
human rights issues and do not concern the minorities alone. The economic
and political forces with a vested interest in the growing poverty of the
majority use religion to ensure that the poor do not wake up to the reality
of their exploitation. Criminals are used when they raise their voice. They
link the crimes with conversions to give them a communal bias.
Thus there is a link between the 1984 massacre of Sikhs, of the Muslims in
1993, the frequent atrocities on the Dalits and tribals and the recent
attacks on Christians. The fascist elements need to find and tackle one
enemy at a time, thus ensuring that the enemy is divided. And many inquiry
Commissions play the role expected of them. It is for the honest citizens
to decide whether they want to let fascist, criminal and communal elements
rule or come together against these destructive forces.
(The writer is Senior Fellow (Research),
Indian Social Institute, New Delhi.)