Gujarat HC asks why NHRC report not tabled in state assembly

Castigating the Narendra Modi government for not placing reports of NHRC on damages and compensation for destruction of religious places before the state assembly, the Gujarat High Court has termed it as a "grave lapse", violative of human rights. The HC, in its verdict delivered yesterday, deplored that no explanation was given by the state government for not placing annual and other reports of the National Human Rights Commission on restoration of religious structures before the assembly till today despite receiving them in early 2005. "Such grave lapse on the part of the state government amounts to clear violation of Section 20 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993," a division bench of acting Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Justice J B Pardiwit said in the order. The court held that the policy adopted by the state government restricting compensation only to damaged residential and business premises and not extending it to places of worship was violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 25 and 26 of the Constitution.

"The policy of the state government taken in defence is one of evading the constitutional responsibility and will bring anarchy in the society, and thus, is detrimental to the establishment of the principles and the tenets of our Constitution," it said.  The court also said that the policy would give a wrong signal to the citizens that "religious places should take up arms in their own hand because in the event of destruction of those places, no financial help would come from government."

"It will also encourage the religious bigots to destroy religious and other places of worship of the economically weaker section for the purpose of establishing their superiority over the others," the court stated. These scathing observations were made by the court while ordering compensation for over 500 religious structures damaged in the state during post-Godhra riots, on a petition filed by Islamic Relief Committee of Gujarat (IRCG) Delivering the judgement, the court slammed the Modigovernment, terming the 2002 communal conflagration as "negligence of the State" and censured it for "inaction", holding that it had resulted in an "anarchic" situation.

"Even if we for the sake of argument accept the defence of the State that the cause of riot was the general reaction from the incident of Sabarmati Express, the failure on part of the police intelligence to gather such general reaction (after the Godhra train burning incident) in time and to take appropriate timely action definitely come within expression 'negligence of the State'," the court said.

"Similarly, the fact remain that the anarchy continued unabated for days ... Itself suggests lack of appropriate action or adequate action, if not inaction, on the part of the State in handling the situation," it further observed. "The state cannot shirk from its responsibilities," the court maintained while noting "Once we hold that there was 'inadequate endeavour' on the part of the state government in effectively handling the situation resulting in destruction of more than 500 places of religious worship throughout the state belonging only to the one religious community."

Passing the order, seen as a major setback to the Modi government, the court concluded, "It is the duty of the state government to restore all those religious places, irrespective of the religion, to its original position as it existed at the time of destruction." http://www.dailypioneer.com/pioneer-news/top-story/41072-guj-hc-raps-modi-govt-for-inaction-during-post-godhra-riots.html


NB: “a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (….) (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission...” : Art. 28 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court


Also see: "Decision to bring Godhra victims' bodies was taken at top level”
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2877196.ece

P.C. Pande, Police Commissioner of Ahmedabad during the Godhra and post-Godhra violence of 2002, deposed before the Justice G.T. Nanavati Commission in August 2004 that the decision to transport the charred bodies of Godhra victims to Ahmedabad was “taken at the top level of the government.” Further, looking to the “sensitive” and “tinderbox-like” situation in Ahmedabad, he himself was of the opinion that the move could cause serious repercussions. Mr. Pande's deposition has been quoted by Gujarat Congress leader and MLA Arjun Modhvadia in a letter he recently wrote to Special Investigation Team (SIT) Chairman R.K. Raghavan. 

In the letter, Mr. Modhvadia accused Mr. Raghavan of deliberately disregarding the “criminal violations” involved in the handling of the bodies, which were transported on the night of February 27, 2002 to Ahmedabad, paraded uncovered and handed thereafter to members of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal. Importantly, Mr. Modhvadia quoted from Mr. Pande's deposition: “…I had not taken the decision of bringing the dead bodies to Ahmedabad. As I believe that the decision might have [been] taken at the top level in the government and it was not necessary for me to interfere in that decision…”

“…When I know that about 58 bodies were being brought to Ahmedabad or that they have already [been] brought, at that time I had a feeling that looking to the communal situation of Ahmedabad, it is a sensitive and like a tinderbox and therefore, in the prevailing circumstances , if these dead bodies are brought to Ahmedabad then possibly it will create serious impacts…” Said Mr. Modhvadia:: “I do not know how you can avoid taking cognisance about facts and evidence of the charge of CM [Narendra] Modi and all those government officials, who intentionally violated structural statutory stipulation(s) about handling of dead bodies involved in crime/accident and made these mere exhibition materials for aggravating communal frenzy in Ahmedabad.”

Mr. Modhvadia said that immediately after the post-mortem, the bodies should have been handed to the nearest relatives and their sensitivities should have been kept in mind given that the bodies were severely disfigured. Said the Congress MLA: “You may read with profit the provisions of the Gujarat Police Manual Vol. III as provided in Rule 144, 145, 223 and 224 where you will find salutary provisions recommending a quick dispatch of the bodies for post-mortem to the nearest hospital, prohibition of taking photographs which are revolting in nature and quick disposal of dead bodies keeping in mind the sensibilities of the victim's relatives. And yet in violation of statutory rules on that fateful day, all the bodies were transported to Ahmedabad.”

Further, “Clearly, 59 bodies could not have moved more than 200 kilometres to Ahmedabad without the knowledge of the Chief Minister, the Chief Secretary and the Director General of Police. Clearly, an intentional violation of procedure was done for the sole purpose of inflaming the passions of the people especially in view of the call for Gujarat bandh given by the political party which constituted the government in Gandhinagar. In violating a laid-down procedure, legal malice is established beyond doubt and when this legal malice has manifested itself into widespread violence resulting in massive carnage across the State, elements of criminal conspiracy are clearly established.”

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2877196.ece