The
verdict against Mayaben Kodnani shows that Modi rewarded her for murder
Hartosh Singh Bal turned from the difficulty of doing mathematics to the ease of writing
on politics. Unlike mathematics all this requires is being less wrong than
most others who dwell on the subject. He is the Political Editor of Open.
In August 2004, I went with a colleague to the
office of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) in Ahmedabad to meet its general
secretary Dilip Trivedi, who was also the Government Pleader of Mehsana
district. We were asked to wait outside a room, where a meeting of senior VHP
leaders was underway. The discussions could be heard clearly. My colleague who
spoke Gujarati told me they were expressing a real fear that the Supreme Court
could hand over investigation of riot cases to the CBI, and the VHP was working
out a strategy to preempt this. As the meeting finished, we were surprised to
see a correspondent for a leading national weekly troop out. My colleague, who
knew him, said he was an active participant in the discussion. Eight years
later, week after week, I still find him writing pieces praising the rapid pace
of development of Gujarat under Narendra Modi.
It has left me with a deep suspicion of all those
who attempt to separate Modi’s governance during the riots from his
achievements as an administrator. Such disingenuous attempts always begin by a
passing reference to the 2002 massacres and end by extolling him.
For one, they are wrong on facts. Modi’s Gujarat
has done no better than many other large states, and in fact it has done better
under earlier chief ministers. For another, Modi’s Gujarat has managed the
unenviable feat of economic growth without alleviating the day-to-day living of
its citizens. Its record on basic human development indicators places it among
the worst states in the country.
But even if the commentators were granted their
falsehoods, the case for separating communal violence from governance while
including economic growth is so absurd that it can only be made with an intent
to justify the events of 2002. It comes from an intellectual complicity in
murder.
The verdict holding Mayaben Kodnani guilty of
murder effectively takes away the last fig leaf that has often been cited by
such commentators, that no evidence of his administration’s culpability has
withstood judicial scrutiny. She was an MLA at the time and led a mob of over
10,000 people that killed 97 people. The facts in this case were never in
dispute, the evidence far too strong to be denied, yet Modi made her a minister
in 2007.
As an aside, but an important aside, let me note that
her case parallels that of Kamal Nath, currently a minister in the Union
government. He led a mob of several thousand that burnt Sikhs to death at
Gurdwara Rakabganj, a short distance from Parliament. His Doon School
friendship with Sanjay and then Rajiv Gandhi saw him being rewarded for murder
by being made minister. But the lesson here is not that we are wrong to focus
on Mayaben Kodnani and Modi, but that we should also continue to focus on Rajiv
Gandhi and Kamal Nath till a similar verdict, guilty of murder, is pronounced.
To
come back to Modi, he had recently argued in an interview given toNai Duniya’s Shahid Siddiqui: “Agar meri sarkar ne yeh dange karvay
toh usey beech chaurahe par phansi lagni chahiye. Jo log maaf karne ki baat kar
rahe hain, woh paap ko badhava de rahe hain. Agar Modi ne gunaah kiya hai to
usey phaansi par latka doh (If my government was responsible for these riots,
then it should be hanged at a public square. Those who speak of forgiveness are
only encouraging such foul deeds. If Modi has done this evil deed, then he
should be hanged.)’’
The case for exemplary punishment in such cases is
well spelt out by Modi. There is no sense in which the crimes that occurred in
Gujarat in 2002 or in India in 1984 can ever be forgotten or forgiven. The
conviction of Kodnani is a necessary step. That it should be announced on the
same day as the confirmation of Ajmal Kasab’s hanging by the Supreme Court is
appropriate. Irrespective of my personal views on the death penalty, the
Supreme Court has reaffirmed that what Kasab did was the ‘rarest of the rare’.
The attack that he carried out on innocents in Mumbai was born of a sense of
acute hatred, was planned and carefully thought out.
In this light, consider what happened in Gujarat in
2002 and in Delhi and several other places in 1984. In neither case was the
violence a spontaneous reaction. Mobs were organised and led by politicians, in
one case largely owing affiliation to the Sangh, in another to the Congress.
The attacks carried out on innocents were born of a sense of acute hatred, and
were planned and carefully thought out. Modi is right, the crime that Mayaben
Kodnani stands convicted of, and Kamal Nath accused of, is the rarest of the
rare. And the responsibility goes all the way to the top. Or why are we asking
for Kasab’s handlers?
