Cover Story: Tiger in Trouble

The Maharashtra Government defiantly rejects the Srikrishna Commission's report in a bid to protect the Shiv Sena and Bal Thackeray.

It takes a lot to trap a fierce tiger. It took Justice B.N. Srikrishna of the Bombay High Court 526 sittings, 10 extensions, a little over five years and an 800-page report on the riots that shook Mumbai in December 1992 and January 1993. Appointed on January 25, 1993, he examined over 500 witnesses over 470 days between April 1993 and August 1997 and the report was submitted in February this year. In between, the commission encountered the hostility of the Shiv Sena. In January 1996, less than a year after assuming power in Maharashtra, the Sena-BJP Government scrapped the commission. Then, following an appeal from Atal Bihari Vajpayee during his 13-day government in April 1996, the commission was restored but its scope was enlarged to include the Mumbai serial bomb blasts of March 1993.

Given this, and the nature of depositions before the commission, it was expected the report would be harsh on the Sena. However, even the most avid followers of the commission's proceedings couldn't have expected the severity of the indictment that followed. Particularly of Sena chief Bal Thackeray and in Srikrishna's choice of words, the commission unambiguously stated that Thackeray "like a veteran general commanded his loyal Shiv Sainiks to retaliate with organised attacks against Muslims". The commission also held that the "doctrine of retaliation" was largely responsible for the "vigilantism" practised by Sena activists that led to the killing of Muslims.

A political storm was inevitable. As expected, the Congress and Samajwadi Party (SP) MLAs stormed from the state Assembly in protest. The SP's Husain Dalwai publicly tore the Government's feeble Action Taken Report (ATR) and declared: "This government has to go ... we have decided to approach the governor and ask for its dismissal." His colleague Nawab Malik was a bit more dramatic. He stepped outside the House and set a copy of the ATR on fire. Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council Chhagan Bhujbal, a renegade Sainik, even called for "the immediate arrest of the so-called veteran general (Thackeray)".

The chorus for Thackeray's prosecution is gaining ground. Already the Naib Imam of Delhi's Jama Masjid Syed Ahmed Bukhari has urged the Centre to prosecute Thackeray. "The Srikrishna Commission has provided enough evidence against Thackeray and other Sena leaders ... the Government should file a case," he told a prayer meeting last Friday. He appealed to the Samata Party, Trinamool Congress and the National Conference to withdraw support to the Vajpayee Government which had "failed miserably to deliver the goods".

From London, West Bengal Chief Minister Jyoti Basu demanded "legal action" against Thackeray "if the present Government at the Centre has even the slightest faith in parliamentary democracy". As of now, the demand for Thackeray's arrest and prosecution is being made by only political parties.

Human rights and minority groups in Mumbai are planning to get into the act. Senior lawyers like Yusuf Muchhala, who appeared for riots victims before the commission, are studying the 800-page report and the Government's ATR. The strategy being chalked out is to file public interest petitions to force the Government to take action. At a later stage, several such petitions may be grouped together to give weight to the demand. Some activist lawyers feel that a judicial verdict should not take time since the commission has already taken evidence and arrived at conclusions. Others, however, believe that the findings of a commission of inquiry are insufficient for an outright criminal verdict and that conviction calls for a proper trial.

There are likely to be two other demands. First, citing the commission's report, Bhujbal has demanded Chief Minister Manohar Joshi's resignation since he was not true to his oath of office. "It is clear that Joshi had in his deposition to the commission endorsed the Sena's doctrine of retaliation. Similarly, Gajanan Kirtikar is said to have led a mob during the riots. Today he is the state home minister. Both should resign immediately." Second, there is certain to be demands on the Election Commission to deregister the Sena on the ground that its commitment to secular principles is suspect. Muslim India editor Syed Shahabuddin has already advocated such a course.

Not that the outcry troubles the Sena and its pugnacious supremo. The Maharashtra Government took less than an hour to rubbish the report. As Joshi read excerpts from the commission report in the Assembly last Thursday, he was oozing scorn and contempt. "I have to reject this," thundered the normally placid Joshi. He was echoing mentor Thackeray's outburst a week earlier -- before the report was made public. The Government's ATR described the report as "biased and anti-Hindu". According to the ATR, the rioting in January 1993 was a "spontaneous reaction by Hindus" to the brutal murder of mathadi (porters) workers and the arson in a Jogeshwari slum. Joshi also berated Srikrishna for "not having a word for those who conspired to destroy Mumbai through the serial bomb blasts".

Those who heard the chief minister defend Thackeray and his Government's decision to reject the commission's findings -- and in that order -- believe that it was perhaps Joshi's finest performance in the Assembly. Delivered in the style of a shakha pramukh, it sounded like an impassioned election speech. Indeed, Speaker Dattaji Nalawade had to remind him on three occasions "to read from the report" and had to repeatedly ask him to bear in mind his position. Thackeray himself patted Joshi for his spirited defence and roundly blamed the media for making the Sena into the "khalnayak (villain)".

The Sena mouthpiece Saamna also applauded Joshi's performance, calling it a "tadakebandh bhashan (scathing speech)". Such was its stridency that the Opposition was completely taken aback. It had expected the saffron alliance to go on the defensive given the severe strictures passed by the commission and be embarrassed at the very least. But the brazenness with which the report has been rejected has stunned the Opposition -- particularly the Congress. Coming close on the heels of the Government's campaign to deport Bangladeshis and the attack on painter M.F. Husain, there is a feeling that the saffron alliance is preparing the ground for a possible regression to hard-line Hindutva.

In fact, the manner in which the Sena-BJP regime has rejected the report and its findings seems to confirm its future course of action. The alliance which came to power on the plank of checking criminalisation of politics and development for the state has now read the writing on the wall. Specially after the last Lok Sabha polls when it was routed. In less than a year and half, the state is due for assembly elections. Too short a time for the Government to acquire a new image, not to speak of fulfilling promises made in the past.

It is quite apparent that Thackeray and the Sena leadership planned and rehearsed Joshi's stridency. Even those portions of the report that they accepted were carefully and politically chosen. For instance, the commission's observations on the then "effete political leadership" and on the lacunae in the police force affecting its operational efficiency in riot-control situations. Where the report has named police officers, the Government has conveniently kept silent. Interestingly, one of the officers named for "strict action for his delinquency" is R.D. Tyagi, then joint commissioner of police, later promoted to commissioner by the Sena Government. Tyagi, who joined the Sena after his retirement this January, has dismissed this as "pure humiliation and denigration" of a retired police officer.

The Maharashtra Government has refused to yield even an inch. To the Opposition there couldn't have been a more shocking setback -- particularly the Congress which is caught in a cleft stick since it can't ignore the report and can't attack the regime either for fear of triggering renewed violence. The SP is slightly better placed as it has the cushion of the minority vote bank. But only slightly. As things stand, the options are limited. Neither the Congress nor the SP though can afford to take to the streets as that would turn the rising anti-Sena-BJP tide among voters back in their favour. They can scarcely afford that. Especially the Congress which has assiduously rebuilt its base, the gains of which were evident in the last general elections. If the 1998 Lok Sabha results are repeated in the assembly, the Congress strength would rise from 79 to 211 while the Sena-BJP would plummet to 70 from 139.

Senior leader Sharad Pawar knows this, a reason why he impressed upon party President Sonia Gandhi to refrain from pursuing a line of over-aggression against the state Government. Pawar is believed to have briefed his partymen in Mumbai to lie low after the symbolic protests and wait for the regime to decimate itself over the next few months. Besides, restraint will enable the Congress to publicise the commission's verdict among minority voters, thereby regaining their support.

In the final analysis, Pawar believes it will be governance, or the lack of it, that will eventually determine who wins. Of course, the Congress could look to the judiciary to hasten its political comeback. It can appeal to the court, pleading the Government be forced to act on the findings of the commission. The courts could well decide in its favour and direct the Government to prosecute Thackeray.

But Joshi has already taken care of that eventuality. "If we are forced to act against Balasaheb, I will resign and join him on the streets," he thundered after tabling the report. Such a dramatic turn is calculated to revive the plummeting fortunes of the Sena-bjp regime, and even turn its leaders into martyrs. In fact, although the SP leaders are talking about pressing for President's rule -- provided the Congress backs them -- they are aware that any move to topple the Government would tantamount to handing over the electoral advantage to the Sena-BJP.

Add to this possible public interest litigations inspired by the Sena focussing on the Pawar-Sudhakarrao Naik feud and its impact on riot-control. A clear indication of this move is to be found in the ATR. While the commission has only peripherally touched upon the Pawar-Naik feud, the Joshi Government has termed this as one of the important reasons "for the riots flaring up ... Because of the differences between these two, the administration of the Maharashtra Government was not only weakened but it also lost its reputation".

The possibility of the Government involving the Congress in the post-Srikrishna recriminations may perhaps be controlled if Pawar's strategy prevails. Pawar and other senior state Congressmen are alive to the fact that both timing and points of pressure will have to be chosen carefully. They know it's a tightrope between implementing the law of the land and losing the advantage to the Sena. In fact, some Congress leaders are even chary of approaching the Centre for the state Government's dismissal. As a senior BJP functionary explains: "The Vajpayee regime could well take it up with a strategic intent. First, it could afford them the opportunity to dismiss other troublesome state governments like in Tamil Nadu and Bihar. At the same time, dismissal could clear the path for the return of the Sena-BJP in Maharashtra. What better opening could the alliance, currently battered on all fronts, ask for?"

The only problem with this calculation is that the saffron alliance is concurrently ruling at the Centre, at the head of a very fragile coalition. Having struggled against the hard-liners in his party and kept the more divisive aspects of the BJP's agenda under wraps, the last thing Vajpayee wants is his national agenda to fall a victim to Thackeray's extremism. A great stickler for form and parliamentary norms, Vajpayee insisted on the restoration of the Srikrishna Commission in 1996. Now, he finds his own alliance berating Sri-krishna's alleged "anti-Hindu bias".

Extremely sensitive to liberal opinion, Vajpayee will be embarrassed by Islamic scholar and reformist Ashgar Ali Engineer's assertion that "Justice Srikrishna is known for his integrity and impartiality and he will not draw any conclusions without ascertaining all the facts and his remarks are based on evidence". If a letter from veteran Gandhian Usha Mehta could compel Vajpayee to pressure the Maharashtra Government into stopping a play on Nathuram Godse, he is certain to take serious note of jurist Nani Palkhivala's belief that "the Sena wants a partisan report just because it is in power. There is no doubt the report is impartial".

But Vajpayee is not entirely a free agent. His problems are compounded by the fact that there are many in the BJP who feel that the Maharashtra Government is absolutely right and that it pays to be uncompromisingly defiant against secularist encroachment. Vajpayee can counter this lobby only if the Congress refrains from making too much of an issue of the Srikrishna report and allows it to gently fade away.

For Srikrishna, this must appear paradoxical. In his bid to ensure justice to the victims of one of the most horrible riots in independent India, his report has ended up reopening old wounds. If action is taken, the winners could be precisely those who are sought to be punished for their role in the riots.

DAMNING INDICTMENT

December 1992 riots caused by demolition of the Babri Masjid, aggravation of Muslim sentiments by Hindus, insensitive approach of the police and spontaneous reaction of leaderless and incensed Muslim mobs.

January 1993 riots caused by communal Hindu organisations ... Shiv Sena led an organised attack on Muslim life and property with its "doctrine of retaliation".

Sena chief Thackeray acted like a "veteran general", his writings and directives through party mouthpiece Saamna commanding loyal Sainiks to attack.

Effete political leadership, vacillation for political reasons ... four days lost as chief minister Sudhakarrao Naik considered deploying the army when its use was imperative.

Precautionary and preventive measures taken by the police were inadequate. Intelligence machinery and apparatus of the police failed.

Built-in bias of the police force against the Muslims became more pronounced ... Bias evident in active connivance of police constables with rioting Hindu mobs, in their role as passive onlookers ...

Has recommended that government take "strict action" against 32 officers, including R.D. Tyagi, then joint police commissioner and later the city's police commissioner, for delinquency.