Gulbarg society verdict: Have the Gujarat riots lost political relevance?

The Gulbarg society massacre verdict was expected to send political temperatures soaring, generate the kind of heat and dust that was seen all through between 2002-2014. But it didn’t ignite the passions in Gujarat and in Delhi as was otherwise anticipated. The banks of Yamuna and Sabarmati remained calm.

It was not because of the fatigue factor. People on both sides of political and social divide have enough in them to debate the issue afresh with same vigour as the nation has seen for past 16 years, since the time, on 28 February 2002, this most unfortunate massacre of 69 persons happened. But the response of most in political spectrum is measured. Unlike in the past there is no vitriolic chorus from the activists and “secularists” pointing fingers at Narendra Modi or the BJP making a spirited effort to defend their leader.

This broadly has to do with two reasons—first, the Ahmadabad special SIT court, which today convicted 24 persons and acquitted 36 other accused persons has negated possibility of a `criminal conspiracy’ behind the heinous acts of the rioters. This means Modi and for that matter Amit Shah could no longer be accused of consciously letting the events on 28 February 2002 happen, when 69 hapless persons were massacred including former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri in Gulbarg society. The special court has convicted Bipin Patel, a BJP corporator and 10 others for murder under Section 302 of the IPC and 13 more have been convicted for other charges.

Second, the special court judgment was based on investigations and evidence presented by the Supreme Court appointed and monitored Special Investigative Team (SIT), not on investigation and evidence presented by Gujarat Police. The SIT couldn’t be accused of the bias, at least directly. The SIT was constituted in March 2008 by the Supreme Court under RK Raghvan, former CBI chief who had a reputation of being a no-nonsense officer. The SIT had submitted its report in May 2010. The court had then asked the SIT to look into the doubts raised by amicus curiae Raju Ramchandran. Subsequent to that SIT submitted its final report including case papers, witnesses¹ testimonies and other details on 15 March 2012. Since the entire thing was under observation of the Supreme Court, the SIT could not be accused of bias, at least directly, in its approach and investigations.

Also, before the trial in the case could be completed and verdict pronounced, the case on various matters has gone through all  three layers of the judiciary – trial court, High Court and Supreme Court. The role of Narendra Modi in the case constituted a central item of proceedings in the court.

The SIT had summoned Narendra Modi, then Gujarat Chief Minister in March 2010 and extensively quizzed him regarding accusations against him in the killing of Ehsan Jafri and 68 other persons. In its final report the SIT had given a clean chit to Modi. Another rounds of petitions including from Ehsan Jafri widow Zakia Jafri followed and prolonged judicial proceedings were conducted.

The question is, will the special court verdict bring some sense of closure to victims’ families? That is debatable. The loss of the victims’ families had been immense and they suffered for too long. Zakia Jafri will go for an appeal.

But the verdict is a way forward in terms of  delivery of justice. Gulbarg and some other massacres had stirred the conscience of the nation and delivery of justice was the least that was expected from the state. Could the state have done better to deliver justice? The answer to that, without doubt is yes.

There is another aspect to the 2002 riots and the delivery of justice. Over the decade and half, the way political and social discourse had shaped, as also the courts had been petitioned mostly revolved around one aspect—implicate Modi for riots and killings. Sustained investigations by various central law enforcing agencies and media scrutiny could not find him legally liable. Modi has since then become Prime Minister with a massive mandate. Today verdict comes as a reprieve for him and the BJP.

The BJP has chosen not to react either way on the judgment. The Congress’s response too is very calibrated. Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat will go to polls next year, UP in the beginning of 2017 and Gujarat in end of 2017. No side is willing to be adventurous, perhaps rightly so in case of a human tragedy of this nature.

It could also be that the Gujarat riots have lost their political relevance. If that is the case, the fight of the victims’ families for justice would become even more tougher.