Anhad

The Proposed Communal Violence Bill 2009 in its present form is totally unacceptable! : Online Petition

anhad e-admin — 2010-02-23T20:19:02Z

This is an urgent call to all democrats and responsible citizens to register their protest to the government of India for not having taken into consideration widespread demands since 2005 by independent legal experts, human rights defenders and secular activists for a much needed proper legislation on Communal Violence. Despite repeated efforts from civil society groups seeking specific changes in the proposed communal violence, the government has turned a deaf ear.

In the present form the Communal Violence Bill has been rejected by all major anti-communal groups in India and it will prove to be dangerous for the minorities, Muslims, Christians and all others. The govt is pushing the bill. We must mount pressure within this week to stop the govt from tabling this bill in the Parliament.

Pasted below is a public statement that was issued after the recent National Consultation on the Communal Violence Bill (see also a critique of the CV Bill: http://www.anhadin.net/article97.html).

We appeal to all to urgently endorse the public statement by adding their names online. We will print and send the above public statement (with all signatures gathered by the March 5th, 2010) to the Prime Minister of India, The Home Minister and to the UPA Chairperson.

To directly endorse and sign the public statement go to: [bottom of this page or http://www.anhadin.net/article101.html] [signatories will recieve an automatically generated confirmation mail to validate your signatures. Please remember to also look into you spam folders too incase you cant find the confirmation mail.]

We also invite all signatories to send individual faxes / e-mails to The Prime Minister, Mr Manmohan Singh ( fax-23019334, <manmohan@sansad.nic.in>) UPA Chairperson and Leader of the Congress Party Mrs Sonia Gandhi (fax- 23018651/ <soniagandhi@sansad.nic.in>)/ The Home minister, Mr P. Chidambaram (fax- 23094221) / <hm@nic.in>/ ) Rahul Gandhi (23012410/ office@rahulgandhi.in) and send a copy to us (anhad.delhi@gmail.com) please.

Please treat this as urgent.

You can use a free faxing facility to send you faxes directly via the internet: (http://www.tpc.int/fax_cover_auto.html) [you must prefix the fax numbers with: +91-11 ]

I sincerely hope we can mobilise atleast 100 letters to the authorities.

Shabnam Hashmi
Anhad

Proposed Model Letter For Those Sending Individual Letters

Date:

To: Honorable Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh

Subject: We demand that the government revise the proposed Communal Violence Bill

Text:

Dear Prime Minister,

I [or we] write to you to vigourously protest against the proposed Communal Violence Bill in its present form that is soon to be tabled in the Parliment. As responsible citizens of this country we find it truly reprehensible and unfair that wise counsel of anti communal groups, human rights defenders and independent legal experts was not taken stock of and their very important suggestions and modifications have been totally ignored. The bill in its present form as is being proposed is dangerous for the health of our secular democracy and it could cause great harm to protect victims of communal violence. We want you to urgently intervene and ensure that the vitally needed legislation on Communal Violence be reviewed and revised. We want your government not to rush in a law for electoral or short term considerations. We want this important law to be amongst the finest and the best in the world; As citizens of country that has been torn and wounded by communal strife, we want a law that best protects us and gives us justice. You will set a fine democratic precedent by taking a step back and listening to our plea.

Yours sincerely

Statement Issued at National Consultation on The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2009

February 12-13, 2010, New Delhi

The demand for a law on communal violence emerged from a brutal record of recurring violence in our country, the increasing occurrence of gender-based crimes in communal conflagrations, and complete impunity for mass crimes. The reasons are many - lack of political will to prosecute perpetrators, State complicity in communal crimes, lack of impartial investigation, and lack of sensitivity to victim's experiences. But there is also, crucially, the glaring inadequacy of the law. Today, despite huge strides in international jurisprudence, India continues to lack an adequate domestic legal framework, which would allow survivors of communal violence to seek and to secure justice.

The UPA Government's Common Minimum Programme in 2004 had promised to give the citizens of this country a ‘comprehensive legislation' to fill this legal vacuum. We were promised a legislation that would strengthen the hands of the citizens in the struggle against communalism. However, The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill 2005, introduced in the Rajya Sabha in December 5, 2005, was a complete betrayal of that promise. The 2005 Bill was roundly criticized and rejected by civil society at all levels. Eminent jurists, legal experts, activists who worked with survivors, and all prominent minority groups rejected the Bill and urged the Government to make serious changes in it. The Bill was sent to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for its review and recommendations. But the Standing Committee report, when it was finally tabled in Parliament in December 2006, suggested no significant changes.

Between 2005 and now, civil society groups have repeatedly engaged with the government at all levels and time and again communicated our serious objections to this Bill. We have written critiques, given alternative formulations, written alternative draft laws, and suggested changes in several specific Chapters and clauses. Civil society groups have met everyone over the last 4 years - from the Chairperson of the UPA, Prime Minister, two successive Home Ministers, officials in the Home Ministry, to members of parliament. And yet the Government appears unwilling to listen.

The UPA government has now introduced an impressive-sounding 59 amendments into the Communal Violence Bill 2009. These have been cleared by Cabinet, and we have been told that the government plans to introduce it in Parliament in the coming session. These 59 amendments have merely tinkered with the Bill. They do not make any structural changes and do not incorporate a single suggestion made by civil society.

This Communal Violence Bill 2009, if passed, will not only be weak, it will be dangerous. It will not only fail to secure justice for communal crimes, but will actually strengthen the shield of protection enjoyed by those who plan and sponsor these crimes. Further, it continues to perpetuate the silence around gender-based sexual crimes.

This Bill is of fundamental importance in addressing the challenges posed to the secular character of our society and in protecting all our citizens. At this National Consultation on the Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill 2009, we the undersigned, once again urge the UPA government to revise the Bill taking on board the following concerns, which have been articulated through wide national consultation:

1. Statement of Objects & Reasons: The objective of the Bill should be to ensure that the State governments and the Central government take measures to provide for the prevention and control of communal violence, which threatens the physical, social, economic, cultural, political and human security of the citizens.

2. Communal violence must be defined as: Any targeted attack committed on the persons and properties of individuals or a group of persons on the basis of their religious identity, which can be inferred directly or from the nature or circumstances of the attack.

3. Scheduled Offences: Situations of communal violence have shown that the range of offences committed is not restricted to the offences enumerated under the IPC and related penal statutes.The Bill must define crimes/ offences, and new rules of procedure and evidence to adequately and appropriately reflect the realities of the crimes experienced by victims and survivors of communal violence.

4. Declaration of Communally Disturbed Areas - The basic scheme of the Bill which envisages the declaration of certain areas as communally disturbed areas, and gives greater powers to the state in these areas, runs entirely counter to the purpose of the proposed law. Chapter II of the Bill must be removed. The state already has sufficient power vested in it by law. However, experience during communal violence is the non-exercise or non-judicious exercise of this power.

5. Sexual violence in situations of communal violence, unlike those in non-communal contexts, is often committed with malicious intent of intimidating, humiliating and degrading the dignity of the victim community using the bodies of women. Inclusion of a wide ranging crimes of sexual violence, in addition to rape, therefore assume great importance in a bill to prevent and punish those responsible for communal violence. We therefore call for the inclusion of sexual crimes into this Bill.

6. Reparations: The Bill must include the concept of reparations as an inviolable, legally enforceable right of the victim-survivor, and according to objective norms and scales that are binding on all governments. The law must specify criteria for identifying who is a victim/survivor and standards which will be applicable to all victims and survivors of communal violence, and not leave it to discretion at the state level.

7. Victim's Rights – the Bill must recognize comprehensive rights of victims and survivors. They must be provided a right to have information of the proceeding at all stages of the proceedings including copies of FIRs and other legal documents, right to participate and be heard at all stages of the trial, right to legal representation of their choice at state costs and right to appeal in the event the state does not do it on their behalf.

8. Command/ superior responsibility implies that persons in positions of official power (civil or military) or senior/high officials of non-state structures and organizations, by reason of their position, have effective control and knowledge or ought to have knowledge of the acts or omissions of their subordinates that causes the violence. This doctrine must be incorporated into the Bill.

9. Prior sanction: The present Bill requires sanction from the State government in order to even initiate prosecution against any officer for acts of omission or commission. This defeats the purpose of the proposed law and perpetuates impunity. Instead of the requirement of prior sanction, this should be a matter for judicial determination at the commencement of the trial.

New Delhi

February 13, 2010

NATIONAL CONSULTATION ORGANISED BY ANHAD, Institute of Peace Studies & Conflict Resolution, DELHI

Endorsed by:

Aashima Subberwal, Delhi

Abdul Shakeel, Haq, New Delhi

Aftab Alam

Ajaya Kumar Singh, Jana Vikas, Orissa

Amitabh Pandey

Anita Tagore, Assistant Professor, Delhi

Anubha Rastogi, Centre for Equity Studies, New Delhi

Apoorvanand, Delhi University

Asghar Ali Engineer, Director, CSSS

Ather Moin, The Siasat Daily, Hyderabad

Atish Mandal, Heritage Worldwide

Avinash Kumar, Oxfam India

Avni Sethi, Student, Bangalore

Azam Khan(Advocate), Peoples Research Society, Bhopal

Azam Khan, Hyderabad

Birju Nayak, Lok Raj Sangathan, Delhi

Brijendra Singh Sodi, LFHRI, Punjab

C Ekka, Vidyajyoti, Delhi

Charles, Vidyajyoti, Delhi

Chayya R, Lok Raj Sangathan, Delhi

Colin Gonzalves, Supreme Court Advocate, Delhi

Deepak Bhatt, Peoples Research Society, Bhopal

Dhirendra Panda, Common Concern, Orissa

Farah Naqvi, Delhi

Father Ajay, Orissa

Fr Anand Muttungal, Catholic Church Bishop Council, Bhopal

Gagan Sethi, Janvikas, Gujarat

Gauhar Raza, Anhad, Delhi

Gayatri Sharma, Partners for Law in Development, New Delhi

Hakeem Khan, Delhi

Harsh Dobhal, Combat Law

Harsh Kapoor, sacw.net

Harsh Mander, Social Activist, writer (Aman Biradari)

Irfan Engineer, IPSCR, Mumbai

Javed Khan- Pairvi- Madhya Pradesh

Jawid Liaq, New Delhi

Justice K K Usha, former Chief Justice, Kerala High Court

Justice Rajinder Sachar, former Chief Justice, Delhi High Court

Justice Sardar Ali Khan, former Judge, AP High Court

Kavita Srivastava, Social Activist, Rajasthan

KS Rawal, Social Legal Information Centre

Lansingli Rongmei, HRLN & All India Christian Council

LS Herdenia, National Secular Forum, Bhopal

Madhu Chandra, All India Christian Council

Manisha Trivedi, Gujarat

Mansi Sharma, Anhad

Md Noor Alam, Marg, New Delhi

Mehtab Alam, APCR, Delhi

Mihir Desai, Advocate, Mumbai

Mohammed A Abid

Mujibur Rehman, Centre for Dalit & Minority Studies, Jamia Milia Islamia

Navkiran Singh(Advocate), LFHRI, Punjab

ND Jayaprakash, Delhi Science Forum

Nisha Agrawal, Oxfam India

Noorjahan Dewan, BMMA

P Vinay Kumar, Constitutional Rights Protection Forum, Hyderabad

Praveen K Bharti, Ummang Partners in Human Development, New Delhi

Professor Rooprekha Verma, former VC Lucknow University, Saajhi Duniya, Lucknow

Promila Loomba

Pushkar Raj, PUCL

R Banerji, New Delhi

Rakesh Bhardwaj- Peace

Ram Puniyani, Social Activist, Mumbai

Rashmi Jena, Advocate, Orissa

Rupesh Kumar, Insan Ekta Muhim, Bihar

Sachin Pandya, Gujarat

Sadhna Arya, Saheli

Sajjad Hassan, Aman Biradari

Satish Sahgal, Delhi

Saumya Uma, Women's Research & Action Group

Seema Duhan, Anhad

Seema Kazi, CWDS, New Delhi

Seema Misra(Advocate), Marg, Delhi

Shabnam Hashmi, Anhad, Delhi

Shafeeq Rehman Mahajir, Advocate, Hyderabad

Shubhi Dwedi- Aali, Lucknow

Shweta Shalini, Justice and Peace Commission

Surabhi Chopra, Aman Biradari

Suroor Mander, Aman Biradari

Tanveer Hussain, Kashmir

Tanweer Alam, Institute of Objective Studies

Tehmina Arora,Christian Legal Association

Usha Ramanathan, Senior Law Researcher, Delhi

Vahida Nainar, Women's Research and Action Group, Mumbai

Vikas Narain Rai, IPS, Haryana

Vivek Shivakumar

VK Mahajan, Delhi

Vrinda Grover, Advocate, Delhi

Yogesh Dewan, Peoples Research Society, Bhopal

Zafar Agha

Zaheeruddin Ali Khan, Siasat, Hyderabad

Zakia Soman, Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan

Zeba, Vividha Women Documentation & Research Centre, Jaipur

Press Release and Final Statement from The National consultation on The Communal Violence Bill

anhad e-admin — 2010-02-13T14:14:53Z

13 February 2010

Dear friends,

Anhad and Institure for Peace Studies and Conflict Resolutions organised a National Consultation in Delhi on Feb 12-13, 2010. The consultation was attended by over 100 senior activists, lawyers, judges and academicians. The following press statement and the attached response to the Communal Violence Bill was released to day to the media.

Those present durign the two day consultation out rightly rejected the Bill in its present form and agreed that if the CV Bill is passed in its present form it will not be in the interest of the victims of any communal violence.

We are seeking endoresement for the statement pasted below as well as to the attached document. We will be sending the two documents to the home minister, Prime Minister, UPA chairperson , leaders of various political parties and other MPs and officials.

Please send endorsements, your name, organisation and city, state .

Sincerely Shabnam Hashmi

Press Release

NATIONAL CONSULTATION ON The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2009

February 12-13, 2010, New Delhi

1. Statement of Objects & Reasons: The objective of the Bill should be to ensure that the State governments and the Central government take measures to provide for the prevention and control of communal violence, which threatens the physical, social, economic, cultural, political and human security of the citizens.

2. Communal violence must be defined as: Any targeted attack committed on the persons and properties of individuals or a group of persons on the basis of their religious identity, which can be inferred directly or from the nature or circumstances of the attack.

3. Scheduled Offences: Situations of communal violence have shown that the range of offences committed is not restricted to the offences enumerated under the IPC and related penal statutes.The Bill must define crimes/ offences, and new rules of procedure and evidence to adequately and appropriately reflect the realities of the crimes experienced by victims and survivors of communal violence.

4. Declaration of Communally Disturbed Areas - The basic scheme of the Bill which envisages the declaration of certain areas as communally disturbed areas, and gives greater powers to the state in these areas, runs entirely counter to the purpose of the proposed law. Chapter II of the Bill must be removed. The state already has sufficient power vested in it by law. However, experience during communal violence is the non-exercise or non-judicious exercise of this power.

5. Sexual violence in situations of communal violence, unlike those in non-communal contexts, is often committed with malicious intent of intimidating, humiliating and degrading the dignity of the victim community using the bodies of women. Inclusion of a wide ranging crimes of sexual violence, in addition to rape, therefore assume great importance in a bill to prevent and punish those responsible for communal violence. We therefore call for the inclusion of sexual crimes into this Bill.

6. Reparations: The Bill must include the concept of reparations as an inviolable, legally enforceable right of the victim-survivor, and according to objective norms and scales that are binding on all governments. The law must specify criteria for identifying who is a victim/survivor and standards which will be applicable to all victims and survivors of communal violence, and not leave it to discretion at the state level.

7. Victim's Rights – the Bill must recognize comprehensive rights of victims and survivors. They must be provided a right to have information of the proceeding at all stages of the proceedings including copies of FIRs and other legal documents, right to participate and be heard at all stages of the trial, right to legal representation of their choice at state costs and right to appeal in the event the state does not do it on their behalf.

8. Command/ superior responsibility implies that persons in positions of official power (civil or military) or senior/high officials of non-state structures and organizations, by reason of their position, have effective control and knowledge or ought to have knowledge of the acts or omissions of their subordinates that causes the violence. This doctrine must be incorporated into the Bill.

9. Prior sanction: The present Bill requires sanction from the State government in order to even initiate prosecution against any officer for acts of omission or commission. This defeats the purpose of the proposed law and perpetuates impunity. Instead of the requirement of prior sanction, this should be a matter for judicial determination at the commencement of the trial.

New Delhi

February 13, 2010

NATIONAL CONSULTATION ORGANISED BY ANHAD, Institute of Peace Studies & Conflict Resolution, DELHI

Endorsed by:

Aashima Subberwal, Delhi

Abdul Shakeel, Haq, New Delhi

Aftab Alam

Ajaya Kumar Singh, Jana Vikas, Orissa

Amitabh Pandey

Anita Tagore, Assistant Professor, Delhi

Anubha Rastogi, Centre for Equity Studies, New Delhi

Apoorvanand, Delhi University

Asghar Ali Engineer, Director, CSSS

Ather Moin, The Siasat Daily, Hyderabad

Atish Mandal, Heritage Worldwide

Avinash Kumar, Oxfam India

Avni Sethi, Student, Bangalore

Azam Khan(Advocate), Peoples Research Society, Bhopal

Azam Khan, Hyderabad

Birju Nayak, Lok Raj Sangathan, Delhi

Brijendra Singh Sodi, LFHRI, Punjab

C Ekka, Vidyajyoti, Delhi

Charles, Vidyajyoti, Delhi

Chayya R, Lok Raj Sangathan, Delhi

Colin Gonzalves, Supreme Court Advocate, Delhi

Deepak Bhatt, Peoples Research Society, Bhopal

Dhirendra Panda, Common Concern, Orissa

Farah Naqvi, Delhi

Father Ajay, Orissa

Fr Anand Muttungal, Catholic Church Bishop Council, Bhopal

Gagan Sethi, Janvikas, Gujarat

Gauhar Raza, Anhad, Delhi

Gayatri Sharma, Partners for Law in Development, New Delhi

Hakeem Khan, Delhi

Harsh Dobhal, Combat Law

Harsh Kapoor, sacw.net

Harsh Mander, Social Activist, writer (Aman Biradari)

Irfan Engineer, IPSCR, Mumbai

Javed Khan- Pairvi- Madhya Pradesh

Jawid Liaq, New Delhi

Justice K K Usha, former Chief Justice, Kerala High Court

Justice Rajinder Sachar, former Chief Justice, Delhi High Court

Justice Sardar Ali Khan, former Judge, AP High Court

Kavita Srivastava, Social Activist, Rajasthan

KS Rawal, Social Legal Information Centre

Lansingli Rongmei, HRLN & All India Christian Council

LS Herdenia, National Secular Forum, Bhopal

Madhu Chandra, All India Christian Council

Manisha Trivedi, Gujarat

Mansi Sharma, Anhad

Md Noor Alam, Marg, New Delhi

Mehtab Alam, APCR, Delhi

Mihir Desai, Advocate, Mumbai

Mohammed A Abid

Mujibur Rehman, Centre for Dalit & Minority Studies, Jamia Milia Islamia

Navkiran Singh(Advocate), LFHRI, Punjab

ND Jayaprakash, Delhi Science Forum

Nisha Agrawal, Oxfam India

Noorjahan Dewan, BMMA

P Vinay Kumar, Constitutional Rights Protection Forum, Hyderabad

Praveen K Bharti, Ummang Partners in Human Development, New Delhi

Professor Rooprekha Verma, former VC Lucknow University, Saajhi Duniya, Lucknow

Promila Loomba

Pushkar Raj, PUCL

R Banerji, New Delhi

Rakesh Bhardwaj- Peace

Ram Puniyani, Social Activist, Mumbai

Rashmi Jena, Advocate, Orissa

Rupesh Kumar, Insan Ekta Muhim, Bihar

Sachin Pandya, Gujarat

Sadhna Arya, Saheli

Sajjad Hassan, Aman Biradari

Satish Sahgal, Delhi

Saumya Uma, Women's Research & Action Group

Seema Duhan, Anhad

Seema Kazi, CWDS, New Delhi

Seema Misra(Advocate), Marg, Delhi

Shabnam Hashmi, Anhad, Delhi

Shafeeq Rehman Mahajir, Advocate, Hyderabad

Shubhi Dwedi- Aali, Lucknow

Shweta Shalini, Justice and Peace Commission

Surabhi Chopra, Aman Biradari

Suroor Mander, Aman Biradari

Tanveer Hussain, Kashmir

Tanweer Alam, Institute of Objective Studies

Tehmina Arora,Christian Legal Association

Usha Ramanathan, Senior Law Researcher, Delhi

Vahida Nainar, Women's Research and Action Group, Mumbai

Vikas Narain Rai, IPS, Haryana

Vivek Shivakumar

VK Mahajan, Delhi

Vrinda Grover, Advocate, Delhi

Yogesh Dewan, Peoples Research Society, Bhopal

Zafar Agha

Zaheeruddin Ali Khan, Siasat, Hyderabad

Zakia Soman, Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan

Zeba, Vividha Women Documentation & Research Centre, Jaipur

Final Statement as Response to the Proposed The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2009

NATIONAL CONSULTATION ON The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2009

February 12-13, 2010, New Delhi

1. Statement of Objects & Reasons – dated 26 November 2009. The objective of the Bill should be to ensure that the State governments and the Central government take measures to provide for the prevention and control of communal violence, which threatens the physical, social, economic, cultural, political and human security of the citizens.

2. Definition of communal violence – We reject the definition of communal violence as stated in S. 19 (1) of the Bill because as noted above, the rationale for this Bill does not provide any protection to citizens whose security is threatened on the basis of religious identity. We propose the following definition of communal violence:

Communal violence is any targeted attack committed on the persons and properties of individuals or a group of persons on the basis of their religious identity, which can be inferred directly or from the nature or circumstances of the attack.

3. Declaration of Communally Disturbed Areas - This National Consultation strongly rejects the scheme of the Bill which envisages the declaration of certain areas as communally disturbed areas, and calls for the complete removal of Chapter II of the Bill. The state already has sufficient power vested in it by law. However, experience, particularly during communal violence, shows the non-exercise or non-judicious exercise of this power by state functionaries. Further empowering the state and central governments would therefore not remedy the situation. Co-relation between crimes and disturbed area is false, dangerous and untennable and must not find place in a law on communal violence.

4. Enhanced punishment – In keeping with principles of rule of law and natural justice, punishment has to be commensurate to the crime. While grave crimes must carry enhanced punishment, a mechanical exercise of doubling the punishment under this Bill will be counter-productive. Other forms of punishment such as disqualification from public office or other forms of debarring from professional associations, or running for public office must also be included in the case of culpability of public officials.

5. Accountability of the Public Servant - S. 17 of the Bill does not serve the purpose of holding the public servant accountable. Criminal law mandates that knowledge and mens rea be proved for the commission of any crime, including dereliction of duty, and the inclusion of the words ‘mala fide' and ‘wilful' in this Bill will make it more difficult to secure accountability.

Presumption of good faith – ‘Good faith' clause has no place in a law with the purported objective of preventing and controlling communal violence, and appears to have been inserted as part of a routine drafting exercise. We call for the deletion of Chapter XII on powers, duties and immunities of the officers. Instead of presumption of the public servant acting in good faith, the same ought to be a matter for judicial determination, in case of a complaint, at the initial stage of the commencement of the judicial proceeding.

Requirement of prior sanction for prosecution: Given the complete impunity that state agencies enjoy for misdeeds of omission and commission, because of the requirement of prior sanction from the government for prosecution, we suggest a modification in the existing provision that would safeguard the public servant from malicious or frivolous prosecution. Instead of the requirement of prior sanction, the same should be a matter for judicial determination at the initial stage of the commencement of the trial. We also call for no prior sanction to be required for 153 153B

Command/ superior responsibility: the doctrine of command/ superior responsibility must be incorporated in any bill dealing with communal violence. Such responsibility implies that persons in positions of official power (civil or military) or senior/high officials of non-state structures and organizations, by reason of their position, have effective control and knowledge or ought to have knowledge of the acts or omissions of their subordinates that causes the violence. When such officials fail to use their knowledge and authority to prevent the violence, they should be held criminally responsible for the acts or omissions of their subordinates. The principle of `Command / Superior responsibility' therefore has to be incorporated into the law if the architects of violence are to be drawn into a legal scheme of punishment and deterrence.

Scheduled Offences: Situations of communal violence have shown that the range of offences committed is not restricted to the offences enumerated under the IPC and related penal statutes. This is best illustrated by the restricted statutory definition of rape, the absence of torture and the doctrine of command responsibility to hold persons in positions of power and authority accountable.

The Bill must define new crimes/ offences, and new rules of procedure and evidence to adequately and appropriately reflect the realities of the crimes experienced by victims and survivors of communal violence. We call for the inclusion of the following crimes:

Sexual violence in situations of communal violence, unlike those in non-communal contexts, is often committed with malicious intent of intimidating, humiliating and degrading the dignity of the victim community using the bodies of women. Inclusion of a wide ranging crimes of sexual violence, in addition to rape, therefore assume great importance in a bill to prevent and punish those responsible for communal violence. We therefore call for the inclusion of rape, forced pregnancy, enforced sterialization and other forms of sexual violence.

Other crimes not included in the scheduled offenses such as torture, ss. 34 and 107 of the IPC.

We call for the criminalization of social and economic boycott of certain groups of individuals on the basis of their religious identity.

Develop evidentiary standards appropriate to the context of a communally charged and violent situation for proving sexual violence. This is particularly in view of the fact that in situations of communal violence, women's access to police stations (for lodging FIR), government hospitals (for medical examinations) and the confidence / ability to pursue legal procedures is substantially reduced during the period of the violence and till the return to a safe and non hostile environment for the survivors of the violence. Hence, appropriate evidentiary and procedural standards are imperative and should include the following:

All investigation should be conducted in a gender-sensitive manner
Judicial cognizance should be taken of the coercive circumstances under which the crime has occurred, and accordingly delays in reporting, absence of medical evidence or corroboration of victim's testimony should not adversely impact the case.
Consent to sexual act as a defense to the perpetrator should be specifically excluded
Introduction of evidence of prior or subsequent sexual conduct of a victim of sexual violence should be explicitly prohibited
Sexual violence in a communal situation should be equated to custodial rape as mob exercises complete control and is in a position of authority.
Hence, the Bill should as in cases of custodial rape provide for enhanced punishment and also shift the burden of proof from the victim to the perpetrator
Victim / witness protection regime for survivors of sexual violence.
Special efforts to be made to conduct the trial in a gender sensitive environment to ensure that the consequent trauma is diminished

6. Investigation – Given that investigations are often influenced by political expediency and institutional bias, we propose that judicial cognizance be taken of the coercive circumstances. No adverse inference should be drawn of delayed lodging of FIR, absence of material evidence, discrepancies in statements recorded by the police. Any variance in the testimonies of the victim-witnesses should be taken as admissible evidence if they withstand the cross-examination.

7. Courts – A time-bound disposal of case should be prescribed without compromising on fair trial standards. If there are any apprehension of the possibility of fair trial at the local courts or lack of congenial atmosphere for victims and witnesses to depose freely, the bill must provide guidelines for transfer of such cases.

8. Protection of witnesses – the provisions related to protection of victims and witnesses are superficial and farcical and do not even draw upon the existing guidelines of the Supreme Court and recommendations of the Law Commission. Victim witness protection ought to be comprehensive, and for all stages – pre-trial, trial and post-trial stages.

9. Relief, rehabilitation & reparations – the provisions in the Bill are grossly inadequate and provide excessive discretion to state functionaries to provide relief, compensation and rehabilitation. The token representation of women and lack of representation of affected victim community in District, State and National Councils does not make such Coucils inclusive. Instead of establising permanent national council, existing mechanisms such as NHRC and NCM may be explored as an alternative. Reparations to be an inviolable, legally enforceable right of the victim-survivor, and according to objective norms and scales that are binding on all governments.

Reparations: Any proposed law on Communal violence must use the concept of reparations as an inviolable, legally enforceable right of the victim-survivor, and according to objective norms and scales that are binding on all governments. The law must specify criteria for identifying who is a victim/survivor and standards which will be applicable to all victims and survivors of communal violence, and not leave it to discretion at the state level. The reparations guidelines must include rescue, relief, compensation, restitution, rehabilitation and guarantees of non-repetition. The rehabilitation measure must include, among other, assistance of soft loans and land allocations to rebuild livelihoods and shelters to levels not less than before the violence and inconformity with the wishes of the affected persons, and the reconstruction of places of worship destroyed in the violence. Any determination of reparation measures must be through a mechanism that is inclusive of members of the affected community. The compensation scheme under the SC/ST Act should be one of the model for compensation of victims and survivors of communal violence.

Internally Displaced Persons: The Bill must acknowledge rights of internally displaced persons who face forced displacement due to communal violence. Reparations should be provided in conformity with international standards for internally displaced persons, including the UN guidelines on Internal Displacements. These Guidelines must be domesticated through adoption of a national policy to include those affected by the violence and a nodal agency be constituted, so that all internally displaced persons have a justiciable framework of entitlements to protect them.

10. Non-discrimination clause – We welcome the principle of non-discrimination that is in S. 58, made applicable to compensation and relief, but call for extending this principle to all sections of the Bill.

11. Special Public Prosecutors – Special Public Prosecutors ought to be appointed in consultation with victims and survivors and should inspire their confidence. Similar observations have been made in judgments of the Supreme Court

12. Victim's Rights – the Bill must recognize comprehensive rights of victims and survivors. They must be provided a right to have information of the proceeding at all stages of the proceedings including copies of FIRs and other legal documents, right to participate and be heard at all stages of the trial, right to legal representation of their choice at state costs and right to appeal in the event the state does not do it on their behalf. Legal aid should be provided to all victims and survivors of communal violence on the same scale as legal aid provided to the state actors.

New Delhi, February 13, 2010

NATIONAL CONSULTATION ORGANISED BY ANHAD, Institute of Peace Studies & Conflict Resolution, DELHI

National Consultation on The Communal Violence Bill

anhad e-admin — 2010-02-11T08:56:29Z

The Common Minimum Programme (CMP) had promised the citizens of this country a ‘comprehensive legislation' that would finally challenge the decades of impunity which communal criminals have enjoyed; which would strengthen the struggle against communalism; which would have provisions to prosecute for mass crimes committed with political will and intent. Unfortunately what we were offered was a cynical, shoddy, and dangerous piece of legislation, whose first avatar was The Communal Violence (Suppression) Bill, 2005. That was then replaced but not vastly improved by The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005.

The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005 (hereafter referred to as the Bill) represented nothing less than a complete betrayal of the promise of the CMP. The Bill introduced in Parliament on December 5, 2005, was then sent to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for its review and recommendations. The Standing Committee called in those experts it saw fit, but again did not open its doors wide in what should have been a public, transparent and inclusive process. Barring one group of women's rights activists who managed to seek time for a formal deposition before the Standing Committee, few civil society activists were invited to give comments.

The report of the Standing Committee tabled in Parliament on December 13, 2006 failed to make any correctives which would retrieve the Bill; it did not make any structural changes in the framework of the Bill towards strengthening citizens as opposed to further strengthening the hands of (communally motivated) state governments; it failed to address impunity for mass crimes; it did not take on board any substantive recommendations related to gender-based crimes; nor did it address the severe lacunae in terms of seeking accountability for the inaction and complicity of state officials in communal violence. The response of the Government of India, contained in the Standing Committee's report, indicating complete satisfaction with the basic structure of the existing Bill, was truly a betrayal of people's faith.

Anhad had organized a national consultation on the bill in June 2007 attended by over 100 top most jurists and activists to suggest non negotiable. After the national consultations a series of meetings with UPA Chairperson, the Home Minster and other officers of the home ministry by Anhad and other citizens groups could stall the bill in that form.

A new version of the CV Bill has been cleared by Cabinet recently. It has so far not been tabled in the Parliament. We are however told that the Govt is keen to table it at the earliest perhaps even during the Budget session in March 2010.

We are therefore calling a National Consultation on Feb 12-13, 2010 in New Delhi of all anti communal groups, senior activists and jurists who have over the past few years engaged themselves actively with the whole process and negotiations. In our opinion it is very important to collectively debate the Bill with the members of various political parties and government representatives to ensure that the bill when finally passed serves its purpose and does not become another tool in the hands of the communal forces.


Invitation National Consultation on The Communal Violence Bill


Invitation National Consultation on The Communal Violence Bill backcover

National Consultation on the Communal Violence Bill

Feb 12-13, 2010

Deputy Speaker Hall, Constitution Club, Rafi Marg, New Delhi

Note: Presentation are for 10 minutes each. Each session will be followed by an open session for 30 -40 minutes

Feb 12, 2010

9.00-10am- tea and registration

10.00 am -2pm

SESSION I

Introduction to Objectives of National Consultation, History of CV Bill

Farah Naqvi

SESSION II

Framework of the New Bill

Definitions, Communally Disturbed Area & Enhanced Punishment

Chair: Zoya Hasan

Justice. K.K. Usha, Usha Ramanathan, Vahida Nainar

SESSION III

Gender Based Crimes

Chair: Prof. Roop Rekha Verma

Saumya Uma, Kavita Srivastava

2pm-3pm

Lunch

3.00pm-7pm

SESSION IV

Command Responsibility

Impunity/ Accountability of Public Servants

Chair: V.N. Rai

Sidhharth Vardarajan, Mihir Desai, Sujato Bhadro

SESSION V

Criminal Justice System

Special Public Prosecutors , Fast track courts, Witness / Victim Protection

Chair: Justice Ahmadi

Justice Sardar Ali, Vrinda Grover, Shafeeq Mahajir

SESSION VI

Reparations

Compensation & Internally Displaced persons

Chair: Gagan Sethi

Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Mary Scaria

7pm-9pm

Compilation of Responses and Preparation of the Civil Society's Response to the Bill by a small core group

Feb 13, 2010

9.00am-11am

Compilation of Responses and Preparation of the Civil Society's

11.00am

Presentation of the Document by the core group –Civil Society's Response to the Bill

11.30am- 12.30 pm

Discussion on the draft prepared by the core group and finalization of the document

Chair: Harsh Mander

Respondents: Justice KK Usha, Justice Sardar Ali, Justice R. Sachar, Prof Upendra Baxi, Asghar Ali Engineer

12.30- 2.00pm

Responses from the House

2pm-3pm

Lunch

3.30pm

Press Conference, Release of the Document prepared during the Consultation

Act Now on The Liberhan Commission Report

anhad e-admin — 2009-11-25T12:38:58Z

STATEMENT

25 November 2009

The Liberhan Commission have brought to our attention once again the real forces behind one of the biggest tragedies of Independent India. It has now become clear from Liberhan Commission's work that the demolition was not an act of spontaneous anger as claimed by the communal forces. It was a well planned crime coordinated by RSS and executed by different progeny of RSS. The political leaders, some of whom were trying to hide behind different shields stand completely exposed as far as there role in the demolition was concerned. In this meticulously planned attack leaders line Vajpayee, Advani, Joshi, Kalyan Singh etc. played their part assigned by their controller the, RSS.

Whatever be the motives of the leak, which it self may be a planned one by some political forces, it is once again clear that rather than debating the issue, mulling over the truth coming out, BJP adopted its usual method of disrupting the proceedings of Lok Sabha. It does not believe in proper discussion so every such time it resorts to the mayhem and the discussion is avoided. What becomes transparently clear is that the whole top leadership of 'BJP and company' was involved and RSS, the organization expert in making the things opaque from public, had undertaken the demolition for political goals. RSS did go on to bring immense suffering to the nation through this demolition. In addition the mask of Vajpayee as the moderate political person also stands torn apart and the scheming, calculating politician, behind the mask stands exposed. Incidentally on 5th December Vajpayee did give some hint about the happenings of the next day.

The government needs to take this report with utmost seriousness as the demolition was not just a destruction of age old mosque, and archeological treasure of the country, but this act was essentially an attack on Indian constitution. It was also an attack on the plural-democratic fabric of the nation. It became a turning point of sorts, which changed the direction of politics and society in the adverse direction. Tragically this paved the way for communal forces to come to the center stage of the politics, this led to massive communal violence in Mumbai, Bhopal, Surat and other places, leading to the loss of over two thousand innocent people and the loss of over 10000 crores of social wealth. It demonized the minority community and began the process of erosion of secular-democratic values. Tragically this led to relegation of minorities to the status of second class citizens. It gave political muscles to the divisive forces, forces which have no faith in the values of Indian Constitution.

While the society at large needs to condemn the ideology of perpetrators of this act once again, it is also time to recapitulate that this was the same ideology which killed the father of Nation Mahatma Gandhi. While at social level we need to resolve to strengthen the values of Freedom movement and comprehensively reject the divisive politics being propagated by RSS and its progeny, it is also time that the demonization of minorities which got triggered due to this demolition needs to be fought against.

We fervently appeal to the Government to take urgent steps to punish the guilty of the demolition and the consequences which followed. Government must act with full strength and forthrightness to take political and legal steps against the culprits to ensure that the law of the land prevails and guilty are punished without any fear. Be it RSS top brass, be it BJP top leadership, starting from Vajpayee Advani to Joshi and other, be it the VHP leaders or the Bajrang Dal leaders, law must catch up with these criminals.

We demand

An urgent legal action against those indicted in the Liberhan Commission report.
We urge upon government to undo the damage done by communal forces to our mixed culture, to ensure the promotion of values of communal amity and national integration.
We also call upon the Government to reach the message of plural values to the society through different communication channels.

ANHAD
23, CANNING LANE
NEW DELHI-110001

'State Ka Order Hai'

Shabnam Hashmi — 2008-08-29T09:58:32Z

'STATE KA ORDER HAI'

A Report by Shabnam Hashmi

An Independent Fact Finding Team visited Indore on August 5, 2008 to inquire into the incidents of July 3-4, 2008 and its long term affect

The Team comprised of:

Dr Syeda Hameed: Member, Planning Commission, Govt of India

Shabnam Hashmi: Member, National Integration Council, MHA, Social Activist

The following account is compiled and written by Shabnam Hashmi on the basis on the one day visit, testimonies of the close relatives of those who died , testimonies of the injured and individual and group discussions with the local human right activists, and an analysis of the media reports of the above period which were submitted to the IFFT.

Dr Syeda Hameed as member of the Planning Commission will be looking at the long term affect of these incidents. The present account deals with the findings and recommendations.

The team visited the following areas:

Juna Risala

Sindhi Colony

Khajrana

Khajrana Village

The following victims / relatives of the victims deposed before the team:

Juna Risala

1. Nazneen- mother of the deceased Mohd Rizwan

2. Abdur Rehman- Advocate and uncle of the deceased Mohd Rizwan

3. Salman Ahmed- 18 yrs, B Com Final- Bullet Injury

4. Gulam Ahmed Khan- locality leader

5. Irshad Khan-19 yrs, bullet Injury

6. Gulrez-19 yrs- bullet injury

7. Rafik s/o victim Alla Baksh – injured- bullet injury

8. Faiz-17 yrs-s/o victim-Aijazul Hasan, bullet injury

9. Nizamuddin, Father of the deceased Zeeshan

10. Salma Parveen, Mother of the deceased Zeeshan

11. Mohd Hanif Pyare Mian employer of the deceased Zeeshanal

12. Members of the local community ( approx 40 people)

Sindhi Colony

1. Khattumal Makhija father of the deceased Hem Chand Makhija

2. Sheela Devi Makhija mother of the deceased Hem Chand Makhija

3. Shanker Tejwani friend of the deceased Hem Chand Makhija

Khajrana

1. Mehrunnisa mother of the deceased Imran- 17 yrs

2. Abdul Rafiq father of the deceased

3. Zaibunnisa- grand mother of the deceased Imran

4. Members of the local community ( approx 10 people)

Khajrana Village

1. Nana Patel father of the deceased Anwar Patel- 19 yrs

2. Mohd Imtiaz brother of Mehmood

3. Rasheeda, Wife of Mehmood

4. Shama Bi, Mother of Mehmood

5. Members of the local community ( approx 50 people)

The team met the following officials:

District Magistrate

Superintendent of Police

Additional District Magistrate

I am writing the account of what we saw and heard. One day is neither enough to understand and grasp the intensity of any communal attack nor to share the grief of the victims. The background of the Amarnath dispute has been contributed in the report by Dr Ram Puniyani.

Background

Amarnath yatra has been one of the major religious tourism activities of the J & K state, well managed by the local population, mainly Muslims of the area, till 2001 when Shri Amranath Shrine Board (SASB) was formed and it took over the arrangements of the pilgrimage. SASB had Governor of the state as the chief and Governor's Principal Secretary as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Gradually the SASB started asserting beyond its mandate, e.g. going on to construct shelters and structures on Pehalgam Golf Course, mainly due to the clout of the Governor who headed this body. In 2005 SASB, contrary to the laws, was granted the permission to use the forest land for the tourists. Incidentally, CEO's wife was the forest officer who cleared this highly illegal demand of the shrine board. This started the process, which ultimately went out of hands of the local government. While Government initially opposed the order of the forest department, the high court stayed Government's decision. Following this the state Govt. transferred the land to SASB and then cancelled it.

BJP and VHP gave a nation wide call to observe Bharat Bandh on July 3, 2008 on the Amarnath land transfer issue.

July 3 & 4, 2008-Incidents in Indore

Indore is the largest city of Madhya Pradesh. It is situated on the Malwa Plateau, just south of the Satpura Range. It is the commercial centre of Madhya Pradesh.

Indore was engulfed in violence for several days after the BJP & VHP gave a call for a Bharat Bandh. What Indore witnessed was well orchestrated mayhem planned by the Sangh against the minority community with the full connivance of the state administration.

RSS and various Sangh organizations under its umbrella have been vitiating the atmosphere of the city for several years. Though the city has a long history of co-existence of various communities and a rich syncretic culture, the systematic communalization of the society has been underway especially since the BJP came to power in the state in 2003.

The pattern of the violence that took place in Indore on July 3 & 4, 2008 clearly reminds us of the systematic planning of the Sangh to eliminate and marginalize the Muslim community on the pattern of the Gujarat carnage of 2002, the only difference being of the scale and the provision of the relief after the attacks.

The SP and the Collector visited the Indore RSS office on July 2nd evening as well as on July 3, 2008 morning.

Even before July 3, 2008 Bharat Bandh, the Sangh members raised highly abusive and provocative slogans in front of some mosques. In Mukeripura and Malwah Mill area slogan shouting was done at the prayer time. Processions with naked swords were also taken out on July 2 in minority areas.

The collector and SP both new to the area , they had joined a month earlier, said in an interview that they did not expect the kind of violence that took place on July 3, 2008. The question is were the incidents of July 2 not an indication enough or did they visit the RSS office to take a brief?

On July 3rd, 2008 in Khajrana colony some small tea shops owned by Muslims were open. About 25 people from the Sangh went there and asked them to shut the shops. The crowd vandalised the shops and beat up the shop owners. They raised highly provocative slogans .A scuffle took place and the attackers also got hurt in that. They returned to the Patidar mohalla and called out to people and a mob collected. They started pelting stones and slowly stone pelting started from both the sides. Police arrived on the scene and threw tear gas shells. The mob retreated towards the Ganpati Mandir.

Between 11 and 11.30 the VHP and Bajrang Dal members started attacking any Muslim that came on the road with hockey sticks. The Muslims for going anywhere have to use this way as there is no other road to go out. Any Muslim that came on the road was surrounded and brutally beaten up, after checking their identity if it was not too obvious. Approximately 50 Muslims including children , women and old were beaten up and injured. The injured covered with blood started coming towards the village mosque. Police did not take any steps to stop the beatings and humiliation of the Muslims. The Muslims went to the police station to ask for help but the Police did not respond. VHP and other supporters were there in large number. Stone pelting started from both the sides. Soon firing started resulting in three deaths (all Muslims) and 19 injured (all Muslims).

As the fact finding team drove towards the Khajrana village we were shocked to see a house which had more than 20 bullet holes. It is a clearly one sided attack since all deaths and majority of the injured are from the minority community. The police had not arrested anyone when we visited the place.

We asked the SP and the Collector how many licenses for the firearms have been issued in the recent past. They decided not to reply to the questions. According to our enquiries more than 2,000 licenses have been issued in the last two years and one hardly need to guess who the beneficiaries would be.

Almost simultaneously the VHP, Bajrang Dal and other goons entered various Muslim dominated areas (Badwali Chowk, Ranipura, Lodhipura, Mukeripura, Narsinghbazar, and Khajrana) shouting provocative slogans, misbehaving with local residents. The police stood and watched.

All shops belonging to the Muslims were attacked. Medical shops belonging to Muslims were attacked. Bengali speaking Muslims were especially targeted.

Violence that erupted on July 3, 2008 took the lives of four people. Imran ( 17yrs) killed by the Police in front of Khajrana Thana, Anwar Patel, Mehmood and Sharif Patel all from the Khajrana village.

Anwar was 19 years, worked as a help in Fatima Patel's clinic. He was hanging the clinic's washed linen when the bullet hit him. Nemichand Patidar an active member of the BJP shot him. The bullet pierced through his body, entering near the eye and coming out near the stomach. FIR was lodged by his father Nana Patel. He is an eye witness to the killing of his son. No arrests have been made.

Mehmood was near the spot where Muslims had started coming in after being beaten up by the VHP goons. He got up on a building to see what was happening. Stone pelting was going on. Santosh Patidar's bullets hit him according to an eye witness. 9 bullets had pierced his body. Police took him to a hospital. His Medico Legal Report or the Post Mortem report was not given to the family. FIR was lodged. No arrests have taken place. Had it been a reverse case we can imagine the number of people who have been arrested.

We met Mehmood's wife and mother who were inconsolable. Mehmood's small son and four daughters face a bleak future as he was the only bread earner of the family.

Hem Chand Makhija, 25 yrs, was a commission agent in the anaaj mandi (wheat market). He lived in Sindhi Colony with his parents, wife and a brother. He was playing cricket when his friends ( Shankar Tejwani-30 yrs and others) came and called him to go with them and join the VHP Bandh Procession. They parked their car at Lodhipura and joined the procession in Mukeripura. The place is about 5 kilometers from the Sindhi colony where he lived. The processionists were shouting slogans: Go back to Pakistan. Stone pelting started. Police threw tear gas shells. When the tear gas shells were thrown according to Shankar Tejwani they ran towards Laxman Singh Gaur's house as that was the place they knew well. Incidentally Lakshman Singh Gaur was the BJP minister till last year when he died in a road accident. In the melee the friends got separated. After sometime when Shankar Tejwani started looking for Hem Chand, he saw someone bringing him on a cartwheel. According to him and Khattu Mal Makhija, Khem Chand's father, he died of a bullet injury. The family has not seen the Post Mortem report. We could not find any eye witness.

Funeral procession of a young boy Imran (17 yrs), who was dragged and killed outside Khajrana Thana by a policeman ( Shailendra) by placing his barrel of the gun in his mouth ,was lathi charged, even though the family had curfew passes for 25 people. Police prevented 'Namaz-e-janaza' on the pretext that women threw stones at them. They lathi charged and used teargas. The father of the boy Abdul Rafiq was badly beaten up by the police when he was carrying his dead son to the kabristan.

When we pointed it out to the SP and the Collector that the policeman who murdered Imran in broad daylight has not been suspended or arrested, they replied that the woman (Imran's mother-Mehrunissa) was arrested in drug peddling that is why she is naming him. Her being arrested for drugs peddling does not change the fact that her 17 year old son was killed in broad daylight. The 11 year old younger brother Shahrukh is an eye witness to the murder. The family had not been able to get a Post Mortem report till the day we visited them.

It is also very important to narrate here that the 500 meter walk from our car to Mehrunissa's house was so filthy we could barely walk with our sandles continuously slipping on the mud and filth and when we returned after spending about 40 minutes our feet looked as if we have been working in open muddy fields for days.

We asked the collector what happens to the development money and why it never finds its way to the colonies where minorities live. We were told that the road is in the pipeline but when it will be built is a big question. I was reminded about the rehabilitation colonies where 5000 internally displaced families live in Gujarat. They have not been able to return back to their villages even after 6 years of the Gujarat carnage 2002. Only after a long struggle by the Antarik Visthapit Hak Rakshak Samiti and several rounds of meetings that we held with the NHRC, NMC and other agencies the Principle Secretary, Gujarat was sent a notice by the NHRC to improve the living conditions of the colonies.

Despite the mindless violence that took place on July 3rd and took many innocent lives, the district administration was not prepared to put an end to it. Many parts of Indore witnessed fresh violence and killings on July 4, 2008.

The areas of Mukeripura, Khajrana, Badwali Chowk, Lodhipura, Mukeripura, Narsinghbazar, and Khajrana were put under curfew after the July 3 violence.

In Juna Risala the policemen themselves resorted to firing. Not all of them in police uniforms. Many in plain clothes and off duty joined the firing. According to local people RAF helped the bandh supporters. Every group of bandh supporters was armed and escorted by the police.

A group of people were returning home after the namaz around 2-2.30pm. There was stone pelting going on near the mosque. There has been a long pending property dispute near the jinsik chauraha. According to local people the situation was not such that the police had to open fire. 8 people got hit by the bullets. Two died and the rest were injured. Majority of the injuries are in the upper part of the body contrary to any norms of crowd dispersal and management. Even if there was a huge crowd, which according to all the people whom we spoke to was not there, police could have first used the tear gas, then rubber bullets, fire in air, fire first on the legs. Many people named the constables Yashwant, Neeraj and Jitendra who fired indiscriminately on innocent boys and others killing two and injuring 6.

Someone screamed at one of the constables who were firing indiscriminately at people: Why are you shooting at innocent people?

The constable replied: State Ka Order Hai.

The injured when taken to the hospitals by the local community were surrounded in one hospital by the Bandh supporters who did not let the hospital treat any Muslim patient. There were also complaints about some doctors giving out dated medicines and injections to the patients in a government hospital. It reminded me of the VHP leaflet which was given to me in 1994 by a senior politician. The leaflet had instructions for the doctors in detail on similar lines. At that time we firmly believed that a doctor cannot do it. But we have seen both in Gujarat and now in Indore that the communal thought has seeped into some of the professionals even in this noble profession.

Mohd Rizwan, 22yrs, s/o Abdul Rahman died of a bullet injury. We met his mother, grandmother and his uncle- Abdur Rehman. His mother and grandmother were inconsolable.

Zeeshan, 18 yrs also died. Zeeshan worked with Mohd Hanif Pyare Mian who has an electric shop. Zeeshan was one of Pyare Mian's finest pupils and was very hard working. A number of people who had crowded into Zeeshan's small house echoed the same fact that the police firing was absolutely uncalled for. The situation was not such that it could force the police to fire.

Gulam Ahmed Khan, one of the residents of Juna Risala responded to the crises and carried many patients to the hospital on a motorcycle one by one. He reached Rajshree hospital with a patient and before the doctors could tend to the patient he was surrounded by about 20 Bajrang Dal members. They shouted: No Muslim patient will be treated here. Swarup Gaur and Harsh Gaur were among the crowd of attackers. They were armed with lathis and some with even swords. Gulam Ahmed Khan thought for a moment that his end has come but the uproar attracted local Marathi women, who came and fought with the Bajrangis and rescued Gulam Ahmed Khan and the patient. They asked Gulam Ahmed Khan to go to another hospital as they could not guarantee his safety.

Gulam rescued many patients and transported them to the nearby hospitals. His kirana shop remained closed for over 20 days as he had no time to sit there.

Gulam narrated to us that people from different communities have lived together in Juna Risala. They actively participate in each other's functions and on daily basis to. The two communities have close ties and this is something which is unacceptable to the Sangh outfits.

Gulam registered an FIR against the three constables who fired at people. They have not been arrested nor suspended, though a SDM level enquiry has been orderd.

State has filed an FIR against Gulam & others under sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 307 and 353.

From our experience of other states and the last 10 years trends we have seen that places where people from various communities visit like the dargahs, colonies where they live together in harmony are especially targeted by the Sangh and now more and more supported by the local police as was evident in Juna Risala. During the Gujarat carnage of 2002 hundreds of dargahs were demolished including those of the famous urdu poet Wali Gujarati and even Ustad Fayaz khan's mazar in Vadodara was vandalised. RSS's latest attack is on Sufis and Sufism. They came out with a big article in their mouth peace Organiser a few months ago attacking the whole Sufi tradition. The Sangh's intentions are very clear; do not leave any space where people can interact with each other. The segregation and ghettoisation breeds fear against the 'other' and it becomes much easier to spread myths and demonize a whole community.

Faiz is a young 17 year old boy with innocent eyes and a childish face. He has science subjects and studies in 12th. The marks will decide his future. With cut off percentages of colleges crossing all limits during the past few years no student can afford to loose even a few days in the present time and day. Fiaz has not attended school for over a month. Aijazul Hasan (age 44) was shot at from close range. The bullet hit his stomach. The intestine has been damaged. He already had two operations and will undergo another surgery after a month. Aijazul who is an auto dealer has not been able to open his shop for over a month.

Constable Yashwant shouted- Neeraj I will pull the trigger first. Neeraj replied: No let Jitendra do it. His aim is very good.

His aim was an 18 year old young B Com final student of Christian Eminent College. Salman Ahmed was returning after saying his prayers around 2.30pm. He heard a commotion and when he looked back he saw 3-4 policemen come out of chauthi paltan and fire. One bullet hit him.

According to the community members all the three constables have a history of misbehaviour with the local residents as well as communal attitude.

Rafik (22yrs) s/o Alla Baksh was injured in firing. He was hit at the thigh joint and had to undergo an operation.

Gulrez (19yrs) - an air condition repair worker got the bullet from the back. He saw policemen in plain clothes firing. According to the locals they even used private fire arms. They had hid themselves behind the bushes and they bent on their knees and took aim at the people returning from the mosque.

Incidents were also related which were very encouraging. While the three policemen mentioned earlier shot, killed and injured people there was constable Avasthi who helped Gulam in taking the patients to the hospital on his motorcycle. From the local neighbourhood a number of people from the Hindu community helped and participated in the funeral of the young boys who were killed.

Haroon Bhai, the owner of Mayur Hospital, offered his free services to all those, who were injured in the riot. According to local Human Rights activist Vineet Tiwari, Haroon told them that total 27 injured were admitted officially in Mayur Hospital, during that period. Out of these 24 cases were of gunshots. All 27 were Muslims. One person, who was the driver of Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM), felt uneasy and restless, so he was sent to the hospital. He was on Glucose drip.

After July 3rd , 2008 incidents some areas, as already mentioned above, were put under curfew After the large scale violence on July 4, 2008 the whole city was put under curfew.

While the whole city including Narsinghbazar was under curfew, the mohalla Chatripura literally next door was witnessing a religious procession. The administration allowed a Rath Yatra of the Venkatesh Mandir. 3000 strong procession was allowed to go through those very lanes and roads which had witnessed mayhem a day before. Sumitra Mahajan, BJP MP from Indore and MLA Mahendra Hardia participated in the procession. Sumitra Mahajan danced Garba in front of the Rath in the lanes which were soaked in the blood of the minority community.

Findings:

1. The violence that took place in Indore on July 3 & 4, 2008 was pre planned as part of the Sangh's larger agenda of reducing the minority community as second class citizens and to break the economic backbone s well as humiliate the community.

2. The RSS played an active role in planning the simultaneous attacks in various localities.

3. The police provided cover to the Sangh attackers during the attacks on the minority community.

4. The police broke all norms of crowd dispersal and management by opening fire on people in Juna Risala.

5. The administration has played a biased role in not arresting the culprits.

6. The state apparatus is threatening those community leaders who have stood up against the injustice by trying to put the charges on them that they are associated with SIMI.

7. Linking innocent people with SIMI is used as a weapon by the police to frighten the minority community.

8. Those police personnel who want to work objectively are under tremendous pressure from the RSS and the BJP politicians.

9. Relief in most cases has been given. The rehabilitation process in under way.

Recommendations:

1. An immediate enquiry by the sitting Chief Justice of the High Court into the incidents of July 3& 4, 2008 in Indore.

2. Suspension of the police officers involved in firing in Juna Risala.

3. Sensitisation workshops of the police personnel on issues surrounding communalism, democracy, Indian constitution.

4. Action against the local RSS head, MP and local MLA for masterminding the violence.

5. Identify doctors who gave expired medicines and injections to the Muslim patients and immediately start criminal proceedings against them.

6. Rehabilitation package to include education of the dependent children of the deceased.