Author: Narendra Kaushik
Publication: Mid-Day
Date: January 30, 2005
URL: http://web.mid-day.com/news/nation/2005/january/102586.htm
H S Pholka, a senior lawyer who
contested cases of 1984 riots for around two decades, is outraged. He cannot
believe that the Nanawati Commission is about to exonerate the Congress
for anti-Sikh riots.
Pholka, who recently had a heated
argument with Minister for Overseas Affairs Jagdish Tytler in a television
studio, where the latter allegedly threatened him, says it is responsibility
of the society to do justice to the victims of the Sikh riots. Excerpts
from an interview:
How do you react to reports that
Nanawati Commission is going to clear the Congress in the 1984 riots?
I don't think the reports are telling
the truth. We expect much more than what has come out as a leak. If the
reports are true, the findings are contradictory. Look, if Bhagat, Sajjan
Kumar, Dharam Das Shastri were not Congress in 1984, who was? They were
the main functionaries of the party. Bhagat was Delhi Congress president.
Sajjan Kumar was a serious contender for chief ministership in the capital
and Shastri was an MP. Jagdish Tytler and Kamal Nath were not of that high
stature. How can you say Congress was not involved after finding Bhagat
and Sajjan Kumar guilty? Don't workers and leaders constitute a political
party? Or is it some commercial company where only the top brass matters?
Of course you can't expect an AICC (All India Congress Committee) resolution
to launch the riots.
There have been eight committees
and two commissions to investigate the riots but not much has been done.
It does dishearten me. But it's
a question of who frustrates whom. They frustrate us or we frustrate them.
Haven't they been punished? Bhagat lost his political career and Sajjan
Kumar has not been able to reach the CM's chair due to the riot cases against
him. This should convey a message to the others - don't think you're above
the law.
If you think they've been punished,
why do you continue to insist on their conviction in the courts?
We're worried about the future.
We look at punishment as a deterrent. We don't want a repetition of 1984.
Mob violence is the biggest menace. Gujarat happened because the guilty
of 1984 went unpunished. Forget Gujarat and there will be another riot
after few years.
Have we achieved anything from the
commissions and committees, set up to inquire into the different aspects
of the riots?
They were all shams set up to frustrate
people. Kusum Mittal committee recommended action against 72 officials
but action was not taken against a single police official. At least 15
such ACPs (Assistant Commissioners of Police) are still serving against
whom there were charges leveled by Kusum Mittal committee. Jain Aggarwal
committee recommended registration of cases. 400 cases were registered.
But most of them - particularly the ones involving VIPs - were closed down.
Congress President Sonia Gandhi
has already said sorry for the riots? Is it not enough?
Can the murderers be pardoned?
This is not done. Either we change our IPC (Indian Penal Code) and make
provisions that a person says sorry and gets away with murder or punish
them according to the law.
It has often been seen that the
guilty of communal riots, more often than not, go scot-free. Would the
proposed law to deal with communal riots help?
Riot violence should include all
kinds of mob violence and large-scale violence. It always happens with
connivance and nexus of politicians and police. We should try all such
cases outside the state where violence takes place. There should be no
discretionary powers with the state in dealing with the mob violence cases.
It should be made mandatory for the district administration to call and
deploy the army after a certain period of rioting. It should include caste
riots (four dalits were lynched in Jhajjar for skinning a cow). A time
may not be far when Brahmins will be targeted in Tamil Nadu.
Do you feel disadvantaged that in
1984, the judiciary was not very active and did not order investigation
against witnesses who backtracked in the riot cases?
You can't set the clock back. Judicial
activism started in 1990s. Retraction by witnesses is a general trend.
To avoid this, statements should be recorded under section 164.
Today, three important posts in
the government including the prime minister's are held by Sikhs? Does this
soothe you?
The Sikhs are very happy. Besides
PM Manmohan Singh, we have Sikhs as deputy chairman of Planning Commission
and Army chief. But 1984 was a law and order problem. This is not an issue
of a victim community. I don't look at '84 as a Sikh issue or Gujarat as
a Muslim issue.