Thursday, July 27, 2017

Sorry, you are late. Justice denied

The Honorable Supreme Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Roots in Kashmir (RIK). RIK in its PIL had asked for:

1.            Investigation and prosecution of terrorists like Yasin Malik and Farooq Ahmed Daar @ Bitta Karate, Javed Nalka and others, for hundreds of FIR’s of murders of Kashmiri Pandits during 1989-90, 1997 and 1998, and which are lying un-investigated by J&K Police even after expiry of 26 years. 

2.            Transfer of all the FIR’s/cases pertaining to murders of Kashmiri Pandits, from State of J&K to some other State (preferably State of NCT of Delhi), so that the witnesses, who were reluctant to approach police or Courts in view of their safety concerns, can freely and fearlessly come and depose before Investigating agencies and Courts.

3.            Transfer of investigation of all the FIR’s/cases of murder and other allied crimes against Kashmiri Pandits in year 1989-90, 1997 and 1998, to some other independent investigating agency like CBI or NIA or any other agency as appointed by this Court, as till date J&K police has failed miserably to make any progress in hundreds of FIR’s lying pending with them for more than 26 years.

4.            Appointment of some independent Committee or Commission to investigate into the mass-murders and genocide of Kashmiri Pandits during 1989-90 and subsequent years, and also to investigate the reasons for non-prosecution of FIR’s of murders of Kashmiri Pandits and Court-monitored-investigation so that the hundreds of FIR’s can reach their logical conclusion without any further delay.  

5.            Completion of trial and prosecution of Yasin Malik for gruesome murder of 4 officers of Indian Air Force on morning of 25th January 1990, which is currently pending before CBI Court in Ajmer and presently not being prosecuted or followed-up by Indian Air Force. And it should be a matter of shame for the Government of Union of India that 4 of its officers of Indian Air Force were murdered by gun-shots in broad daylight by JKLF terrorist Yasin Malik on 25th January 1990, with many eye-witnesses present there, and till date the charges are not framed in the said case, let alone the punishment. 

The Honorable Court in its order headed by that a bench of Chief Justice JS Khehar and Justice DY Chandrachud said '... the instances referred in the petition pertain to the year 1989-90, and more than 27 years have passed by since then. No fruitful purpose would emerge, as the evidence is unlikely to be available at this late juncture.'  

The order from Supreme Court surprised not only the displaced community but even many legal Pundits. The Honorable  Court surprisingly threw the burden upon the victims on getting a closure instead  of prosecuting and investigating agencies of both the Central and State governments, which have failed miserably in bringing the cases to closure. 

What the Honorable Apex Court apparently missed to notice is that Kashmiri Pandits were ethnically cleansed and erased from their land of their ancestors, and the first and logical effort of such community will be their fight for survival. The community took time to rebuild itself from scratch. The survival of existence was more important than battle of justice, because dead men can’t approach court for justice. 

What makes many wonder is why did J&K High Court or Supreme Court not take suo-motu cognizance of offences itself, when it could take suo-motu cognizance of a murder case of ‘lynching by cow-vigilantes.’     If trial of Bilkis Yakub Rasool gang rape case could be shifted out from Gujarat to Mumbai on the apprehension of the victim and the witnesses could come to harm if the trial was held in Gujarat, why didn’t the Honorable Apex Court appreciate that same stands true for the witnesses and victims of terrorism in the troubled state of Jammu & Kashmir. 

The court missed the basic point, that it is not the Kashmiri Pandits that are in delay. It is Central and State Government that are in delay, it is the courts of this country that have delayed in delivering justice. 

The Supreme in its order while mentioned that 27 years is too late for Kashmiri Community to seek justice, they did not appreciate the fact that community approached every organ of the executive to get justice delivered. They did not appreciate that every political party that came to power in Centre or State, kept promising that they will get justice soon. Many of the cases are pending in various courts without any closure. The Supreme Court conveniently ignored that a victim will approach Supreme Court only after all doors of Justice are closed and that does not happen immediately.  

Supreme Court did not appreciate that 1984 Sikh riots case, which is more than 32 years old, is still to see a final closure, and was opened much later after its occurrence. Ram Janambhoomi – Babri Masjid case is pending since decades, and the recent reopening of cases against top BJP Leaders for Babri Masjid demolition, after the gap of 25 years, should have met the same fate as ours plea. But it was otherwise. A depilated building deserves justice but not 5 lakh Kashmiri Pandits.

Honorable Supreme Court posed a question to the petitioner that how the police will collect evidence after 27 years? A little surprising, because then what made Court believe police or CBI will get evidence in Sikh Riots of 1984 by an unknown mob. In the cases of murders of Kashmiri Pandits, eye witnesses and immediate family members of the victims are still alive. But where should they go to give evidence, when the police is not working and unfortunately the Courts are not interested, and the cases are in areas where he has threat to life.  

In 2014, almost 23 years after it was reported, the trial court in J&K directed state government to further investigate the infamous Konan Poshpora mass rape case. Inspite of multiple probes dismissing the allegations as false, the court while dismissing the revision petition filed by the Indian Army said "crime never dies". The court said that a “delay in investigation” doesn’t debar an investigating agency from “unraveling the truth

In 1999, Government of India, appointed Mukherjee Commission, headed by a retired Supreme Court Justice,  to investigate the death of Subash Chandra Bose, 54 years after his death. Netaji Bose, the great freedom fighter of India, went missing in a foreign country and has been believed to be dead in a plane crash. The retired justice did not for a moment say that where will the evidence come from after 54 years, that too from an investigation which would be spread over few countries. But today the Honorable Supreme Court informed us that it is impossible to gather evidence of killing of 700 people who were killed over period in the last 27 years, in a territory which is a part of Union of India. 

Bangladesh in 2015 executed perpetrators of war crimes committed in 1971, 45 years later. Is the honorable court trying to convey that Bangladesh's legal and justice system better than India? While Israel continued to hunt their Nazi persecutors for 50 years, our system wants us to believe that justice is time bound, and now 700 murders will go unpunished and unnoticed from the history of the largest Democracy in the World. 

Today’s dismissal of PIL by Supreme Court has practically killed all the hopes of any justice to a marginalized community; a community which chose to lose everything but not its love for mother India and its constitution. Today the killers of the community must be gleaming over the fact that they are above everyone else, with a slight regret, “why did we not kill more?”


https://rainaamit.wordpress.com/2017/07/27/sorry-you-are-late-justice-denied/

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

LETTER TO MR. RAJIV GANDHI BY JAGMOHAN APRIL 21, 1990

Dear Shri Rajiv Gandhi,

You have virtually forced me to write this open letter to you. For, all along, I have Rajiv Gandhi persistently tried to keep myself away from party politics and to use whatever little talent and energy I might have to do some creative and constructive work, as was done recently in regard to the management and improvement of Mata Vaishno Devi shrine complex and to help in bringing about a sort of cultural renaissance without which our fast decaying institutions cannot be nursed back to health. At the moment, the nobler purposes of these institutions, be they in the sphere of executive, legislature or judiciary etc. have been sapped and the soul of justice and truth sucked out of them by the politics of expediency.

You and your friends like Dr. Farooq Abdullah are, however, bent upon painting a false picture before the nation in regard to Kashmir. Your senior party men like Shiv Shankar and N.K.P. Salve have, apparently at your behest, been using the forum of the Parliament for building an atmosphere of prejudice against me. The former raked up a fourteen-year old incident of Turkman Gate and the latter a press interview an interview that I never gave to hurl a barrage of accusations of communalism against my person. Mani Shankar Iyer, too, has been dipping his poisonous darts in the columns of some magazines. I, however, chose to suffer in silence all the slings and arrows of this outrageous armoury of disinformations. Only rarely did I try to correct gross distortions by sending letters to the editors of newspapers and magazines. My intention was to remain content with a book, an academic and historic venture which, I believed, I owed to the nation and to history.

But the other day some friends showed to me press clippings of your comments in the election meetings in Rajasthan.
That, I thought, was the limit. I realised that, unless I checked your intentional distortions, you would spread false impression about me throughout the country during the course of your election campaign.
WARNING SIGNALS: Need I remind you that from the beginning of 1988, I had started sending “Warning Signals” to you about the gathering storm in Kashmir ? But you and the power wielders around you had neither the time, nor the inclination, nor the vision, to see these signals. They were so clear, so pointed, that to ignore them was to commit sins of true historical proportions.
To recapitulate and to serve as illustrations, I would refer to a few of these signals. In August 1988, after analysing the current and undercurrents, I had summed up the position thus: “The drum-beater of parochialism and fundamentalism are working overtime. Subversion is on the increase. The shadows of events from across the border are lengthening. Lethal weapons have come in. More may be on the way”. In April 1989, I had desperately pleaded for immediate action I said: “The situation is fast deteriorating. It has almost reached a point of no return. For the last five days, there have been large-scale violence, arson, firing, hartals, casualties and what not. Things have truly fallen apart. Talking of the Irish crisis, British Prime Minister Disraeli had said: “It is potatoes one day and Pope the next”. Similar is the present position in Kashmir. Yesterday, it was Maqbool Bhat; today it is Satanic Verses; Tomorrow it will be repression day and the day after it will be something else. The Chief Minister stands isolated. He has already fallen-politically as well as administratively; perhaps, only constitutional rites remain to be performed. His clutches are too soiled and rickety to support him. Personal aberrations have also eroded his public standing. The situation calls for effective intervention. Today may be timely, tomorrow may be too late”. Again, in May, I expressed my growing anxiety: ‘What is still more worrying is that every victory of subversionists is swelling their ranks, and the animosity is being diverted against the central authorities”. But you chose not to do anything. Your inaction was mistifying. Equally mistifying was your reaction to my appointment for the second term. How could I suddenly become cammunal, anti-muslim and what not ?
When I resigned in July 1989, there was no rancour. You wanted me to fight, as your party candidate, election for the South Delhi Lok Sabha seat. Since I had general revolusion for the type of politics which out country had, by and large, come to breed, I declined the offer. If you had any serious reservation about my accepting the offer of J and K Governorship for the second term, you could have adopted the straight forward course and apprised me of your views. I would have thought twice before going into a situation which had virtually reached a point of no return. There would have been no need for you to resort to false accusations.
May be you do not consider truth and consistency as virtues. May be you believe that the words inscribed on our national emblem – Satyameva Jayate – are mere words without meaning and significance for motivating the nation to proceed in the right direction and build a true and just India by true and just means. Perhaps power is all that matters to you – power by whichever means and at whatever cost.
REALITY: In regard to the conditions prevailing before and after my arrival on the scene, you and your collaborators have been perverting reality. The truth is that before the imposition of Governor’s rule on January 19, 1990, there was a total mental surrender. Even prior to the day (December 8, 1989) of Dr. Rubaiye Sayeed’s kidnapping, when the eagle of terrorism swooped the state with full fury, 1600 violent incidents, including 351 bomb blasts had taken place in eleven months. Then between January 1 and January 19, 1990, there were as many as 319 violent acts – 21 armed attacks, 114 bomb blasts, 112 arsons, and 72 incidents of mob violence.
You, perhaps, never cared to know that all the components of the power structure had been virtually taken over by the subversives. For example, when Shabir Ahmed Shah was arrested in September 1989, on the Intelligence Bureau’s tip- off, Srinagar Deputy Commissioner flatly refused to sign the warrant of detention. Anantnag Deputy Commissioner adopted the same attitude. The Advocate-General did not appear before the Court to represent the state case. He tried to pass on the responsibility to the Additional Advocate General and the Government council. They, too, did not appear.
Do you not remember what happened on the day of Lok Sabha poll in November 22, 1989 ? In a translating gesture, TV sets were placed near some of the polling booths with placards reading “anyone who will cast his vote will get this”. No one in the administration of Dr. Farooq Abdullah took any step to remove such symbols of defiance if authority.
Let me remind you that Sopore is the hometown of Gulam Rasool Kar, who was at that time a Cabinet Minister in the State Government. It is also the hometown of the Chairman of the Legislative Council, Habibullah, and also of the former National Conference MP and Cabinet Minister, Abdul Shah Vakil. Yet only five votes were cast in Sopore town. In Pattan, an area supposedly under the influence of Iftikar Hussain Ansari, the then Congress (I) Minister, not a single vote was cast. Such was the commitment and standing of your leaders and collaborators in the State.
And you still thought that subversion and terrorism could be fought with such political and administrative intruments.
Around that point of time, when the police set-up was getting rapidly demoralised, when intelligence was fast drying up, when inflitration in services was bringing stories of subversives plan like TOPAC, your protage, Dr. Farooq Abdullah was either going abroad or releasing 70, hardcore and highly motivated torrosists who were trained in the handling of dangerous weapons, who had contacts at the highest level in Pakistan occupied Kashmir, who knew all the devious routes of going to and returning from Pakistan and whose detention had been approved by the three member advisory board presided over by the Chief Justice. Their simultaneous release enabled them to occupy key positions in the network of subversion and terrorism and to complete the chain which took them again to Pakistan to bring arms to indulge in killings and kidnappings and other acts of terrorism. For example, one of the released persons, Mohd. Daud Khan of Ganderbal, became the Deputy Commander-in-Chief of a terrorist outfit, Al-Bakar, and took a leading part in organising a force of 2,500 Kashmiri Youths. Who is to be blamed for all the heinous crimes subsequet}y committed by these released 70 terrorists ? I would leave this question answered by the people to whom you are talking about the “Jagmohan Factor”.
The truth, supported by preponderence of evidence, is that before January 19, 1990, the terrorist had become the real ruler. The ground had been yielded to him to such an extent that dominated the public mind. He could virtually swim like a fish in the sea. Would it matter if the sea was subsequently surrounded ?
LABELLING ANTI-MUSLIM: In your attempt to hide all your sins of omission and commission in Kashmir and as a part of your small politics which can not go beyond dividing people and creating vote banks, you took special pains to demolish all regards and respects which the Kashmiri masses, including the Muslim youth, had developed for me during my first term from April 26,1984, to July 12,1989. Against all facts, unassailable evidence, and your own precious pronouncements, you started me labelling me as anti-Muslim.
May I, in this connection, also invite your attention to three of the important suggestions made in my book, Rebuild- ing Shahjahanabad: The Walled City of Delhi. One pertained to the creation of the green velvet between Jama Masjid and Red Fort; the second to the construction of a road linking Parliament House with the Jama Masjid complex, and the third to the setting up of a second Shahajhanabad in the Mata Sundari road-Minto road complex, reflecting the synthetic culture of the city, its traditional as well as its modern texture. Could such suggestions I ask you, come of an anti-Muslim mind ?

FORUM OF PARLIAMENT: How you and your associates use the fonum of Parliament undermine my standing amongst the Kashmiri Muslims, was evident from what N.KP. Salve, MP ?, did in the Rajya Sabha on May 25, 1990.
Referring to the so called interview to the Bombay Weekly, THE CURRENT – an interview which I never gave – Salve chose wholly unjustified expressions; “There was a patent and palpable attitude if very disconcerting communal bias and, therefore, he (Governor) was happy under the garb of eliminating the terrorist, the saboteurs and the culprits, in eliminating the whole community as it were; now the Governor has himself given profuse and unabashed vent to his malicious malignity, hate and extreme dislike, branding every member of a particular community as a militant”.
I know Salve. I do not think, if left to himself, he would have done what he did. Clearly, he was goaded to say something which was against his training and background. But the elementary precaution which any jurist, at least a jurist of Salve’s imminence, would have taken, was to first check up whether any such interview weekly had been given by me, and if so, whether the remarks attributed to me were actually made. The unseemly haste was itself revealing. The issue was raised on May 25, while the weekly was dated May 26 June 2, 1990. You yourself rushed a let to the President on May 25, on the basis ofthe interview that in reality did not exist. You explained that V.P. Singh had appointed a person with “Rabid Communalist Opinion as Governor. You also got your letter widely published on May 25 itself.
Since your party men did not allow me to have my say in the Rajya Sabha, even when an opportunity came my way to speak on the subject, I was left with no other option but to file a 20 Lakhs damage suit against the Current Weekly in the Delhi High Court. The case may take a long time and I may donate the damages, if and when awarded, to charity, but I intend sparing no effort to expose all those who have played dirty roles in the disinformation-drama.
ARTICLE-370: You created a scene on March 7, 1990, at the time of the visit of the All Party Committee to Srinagar, and made it a point to convey to the people in 1986 I wanted to have Article 370 abrogated. At that critical juncture, when I was fighting the forces of terrorism with my back to the wall beginning to turn the corner after frustrating the sinister designs of the subversives from January 26, 1990 onwards, you thought it appropriate to cause hostility against me by tearing the facts out of context. Whether this act of yours was responsible or irresponsible, I would leave to the nation to decide.
What I had really pointed out in August-September 1986 was: ‘Article 370 is nothing but a breeding ground for the parasites at the heart of the paradise. It skins the poor. It deceives them with its mirage. It lines the pockets of the “power elites”. It fans the ego of the new sultans, in essence, it creates a land without justice, a land full of crudities and contradictions. It props up politics of deception, duplicity and demagogy. It breeds the microbes of subversion. It keeps alive the unwholesome legacy of the two-nation theory. It sufficates the very idea of India and fogs the very vision of a great social and cultural crucible from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. It could be an epicentre of a violent earth-quake, the tremors of which would be felt all over the country with unforeseen consequences.
I had argued, ‘The fundamental aspect which has been lost sight of in the controversy for deletion or retention of Article 370 is its misues. Over the years, it has become an instrument of exploitation in the hands of the ruling political elites and other vested interests in bureaucracy, business, judiciary and bar. Apart from the politicians, the richer classes have found it aonvenient to amass wealth and not allow healthy financial legislation to come to the State. The provisions of the Wealth Tax, the Urban Land Ceiling Act, the Gift Tax etc, and other beneficial laws of the Union have not been allowed to be operated in the State under the cover of Article 370. The common people are prevented from realising that Article 370 is actually keeping them impoverished and denying them justice and also their due share in the economic advancement.’
My stand was that the poor people of Kashmir had been exploited under the protective wall of Article 370 and that the correct position needed to be explained to them. I had made a number of suggestions in this regard and also in regard to the reform and reorganisation of the institutional framework. But all these were ignored. A great opportunity was missed.
Subsequent events have reinforced my views that Article 370 and its by product, the separate Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir must go, not only because it is legally and constitutionally feasible to do so, but also because larger and more basic considerations of our past history and contemporary life require it. The Article merely facilitates the growth and continuation of corrupt oligarchies. It puts false notions in the minds of the youth. It gives rise to regional tensions and conflicts and even the autonomy assumed to be available is not attainable in practice. The distinct personality and cultural identity of Kashmir can be safeguarded without this Article. It is socially regressive and causes situations in which women lose thier right if they marry non-State subjects and persons staying for over 44 years in the State are denied elementary human and democratic rights. And, above all, it does not fit into the reality and requirement of India and its vast and varied span. What India needs today is not petty sovereignties that would sap its spirit and aspirations and turn it into small “banana-republics” in the hands of ‘tin-pot dictators’, but a new social, political and cultural crucible in which values of truth and rectitude, of fairness and justice, and of compassion and catholicity, are melted, purified and moulded into a vigorous and vibrant set- up which provides real freedom, real democracy and real resurgence to all.
I must also point out that when other States in the Union ask for greater autonomy, they do not mean separation of identities. They really want decentralisation and devolution of power, so that administrative and development work is done speedily and the quality of service to the people improves. In Kashmir, the demand for retaining Article 370 with all its ‘pristine purity’, that is, without the alleged dilution that has taken place since 1953, stems from different motivation. It emanates from a clever strategy to remain away from the mainstream, to set up a separate fiefdom, to fly a separate flag, to have a Prime Minister rather than a Chief Minister, and Sadr-i-Riyasat instead of a Governor, and to secure greater power and patronage, not for the good of the masses, not for serving the cause of peace and progress or for attaining unity amidst diversity, but for serving the interests of ‘new elites’, the ‘new Sheikhs’.
All those aspiring to be the custadians of the vote-banks continue to say that Article 370 is a matter of faith. But they do not proceed further. They do not ask themselves: What does this faith mean? What is its rationale ? Would not bringing the State within the full framework of Indian Constitution give brighter lustre and sharper teeth to this faith and make it more just and meaningful ?
In a similar strain, expressions like ‘historical necessity’ and ‘autonomy’ are talked about. What do these mean in practice ? Does historical necessity mean that you include, on paper, Kashmir in the Indian Union by one hand at a huge cost and give it back, in practice, by another hand on the golden platter ? And what does autonomy or so called pre-1953 or pre- 1947 position imply ? Would it not amount to the Kashmiri leadership say in: ‘you will send and I will spend; you will have no say even if I build a corrupt and callous oligarchy and cause a situation in which Damocles’ sword of secession could be kept hanging on your head’ ?
KASHMIRI PANDITS: You and the like of you have made India a country which has lost capacity to be true and just. Anyone trying to be fair is dubbed communal. The case of the Kashmiri Pandits bears eloquent testimony to this fact.
Whatever be the vicissitudes of the Kashmiri Pandits’ history and whatever unkind quirks their fate might have brought to them in the past, these all pale into insigficance in companison to what is happening to them at present. The grim tragedy is compounded by the equally grim irony that one of the most intelligent subtle, versatile, and proud community of the country is being virtually reduced to extinction in free India. It is suffering not under the fanatic zeal of mediaeval Sultans like Sikander or under the tyrannical regime of Afghan Governors, but under the supposedly secular rule of leaders like you, V.P. Singh and others who unabashed search for personal and political power is symbolised by calculated disregard of the Kashmiri migrants’ current miserable plight and the terrible future that stares in their eyes. And to fill their cup of pain and anguish, there are bodies like ‘Committee for Initiative on Kashmir’ which are over-anxious and over active to rub salt into their wounds, and to label anyone who wants to stand by them in their hour of distress as communal.
In a soft, superficial, permissive and, in many ways, cruel India which has the tragic distinction of creating over one lakh refugees from its own flesh and blood and then casting them aside like masterless cattle to fend for themselves on the busy and heartless avenues of soulless cities, chances for Kashmiri Pandits to survive as a distinct community are next to nothing. Split, scattered and deserted practically by all, they stand today all alone, looking hopelessly at a leaking, rudderless, boat at their feat and extremely rough and tumultuous sea to face before they can reach a safe shore across to plant their feet firmly on an assured future.
The deep crisis through which the Kashmiri migrants, or for that matter, the entire Kashmir, is passing is really the crisis of Indian values – the perversion, in practice, of its constitutional, political, social and moral norms. If I visited the camps of the refugees and tried to extend the firm hand of justice to a community in pain, if I instructed that, instead of cash doles, the migrant Government servants should be given leave salary, and if I conceded the demand of a widow of the person brutally killed by a terrorist, for allotment of a house on payment, I became communal, a known anti-Muslim, about whom concoted stories were planted in the press. If, on the other hand, someone falsely accused the Indian Army and the Governor’s administration, if he assailed Jagmohan in particular, of giving inducements through provisions of plots and trucks, without giving particulars either of plots or of trucks, his accusations got published all over the press, his reports were flaunted in national and international forums and were copiously quoted in Parliament by the members of your party and he was labelled as secular and progressive and champion of human rights and what not. Hard Evidence about ‘Jagmohan Factor’. I do not like to refer to anything that looks like indulging in self-praise. But not to let you get away with your calculated campaign of disinformation, about Jagmohan communal factor, I must invite attention to some hard evidence about what the people of the Valley actually thought about me before you and your proteges started the smear campaign on my appointment for the second term.
Your principal prop of current politics of Kashmir, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, was not to be left behind in the drive launched to create an ‘anti-Muslim’ image of mine. In his interview published in the Times of India of August 30, 1990, he said, “A known anti-Muslim was appointed as Governor of a Muslim majority state”. How untrue, how unfair, was the propaganda, should be obvious from the fact that on November 7, 1986, at the time of his swearing-in-ceremony, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, in a public speech for which the records exist, said: “Governor Sahib, we should need you very badly. It is, indeed, amazing that such remarkable work could be done by you in a short time through an imbecile and faction-ridden bureaucracy. If today three ballot boxes are kept – one for the National Conference, one for the Congress and one for you, your ballot box would be full while the other two ballot boxes would be empty”.
The misfortune of our country is that we have leaders like Dr. Farooq Abdullah who have no regard for facts or truth and whose superficiality is matched only by their unprincipled politics.
Incidentally, did it not strike you that Dr. Farooq was virtually accusing your late mother of being anti-Muslim because she was the Prime Minister when, in April 1984, a ‘known anti-Muslims’ was appointed for the first term, as ‘Governor of a Muslim majority State” ?
Apparently in consultation with you, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, on February 15, 1990, issued a written statement to the press in Urdu in which he inter alia, said, “The Governor, in the personification of ‘Hallaqu’ and ‘Changez Khan’, is bent upon converting the valley into a vast graveyard. On account of continuous curfew since January 20, it is difficult to say how many hundreds of people have become victim of the bullets of the army and paramilitary forces, and in this general slaughter how many hundreds of houses have been destroyed. At this moment, when Kashmiris are witnessing their beloved country being converted into a vast graveyard. I appeal to the national and international upholders of humanity to intervene in Kashmir and have an internatianal inquiry made into the general slaughter of Kashmiris at the hands of army and paramilitary forces”.
Here is your ‘patriot’ calling Kashmir “Aziz Wattan”, suggesting a separate country. Here is your ‘national leader’ asking for an international inquiry into the general slaughter of the Kashmiris by the Indian Army and paramilitary forces. Here is your ‘responsible friend’ speaking about the continuous curfew for 25 days in the valley and his consequent inability to find out many ‘hundreds of innocent and unarmed Kashmiris’ had been massacred and how many hundreds of Kashmiri houses razed to the ground, although he knew perfectly well that there had been a number of days when there was no day- curfew, partially or wholly, and the authorities had brought out the list of casualties, about 40 upto February 16, and were daily asking the public to provide with the additional names, if they had any, so that correction in the official list could be made. Here is an erstwhile Chief Minister who did not care to explain how ‘innocent and unarmed’ people were ruthlessly shooting down IAF officers, BSF jawans, senior officers of the Television and Telecommunications Department and young men in the streets; and how, while inciting people through lengthy and fiery statements, he did not find a single word to condemn such brutal murders.
Is the nation not entitled to know why you have not disowned such unfortunate behaviour on the part of Dr. Farooq Abdullah? And how do you account for his recent statement as published in The Times of India of February 7, 1991: ‘I directed my partymen to lie low, go across the border, get training in arms handling; do anything but not get caught by Jagmohan’ ?
Stabbing me in the back at personal level, perhaps, did not matter. But by keeping the pot boiling, you your proteges prolonged the agony of Kashmir and caused many more deaths and much more destruction. The politics of unscrupulousness was brought to its lowest depth.
ROOTS: You once said, ‘I do not read history; I make history’. Apparently, you do not know that those who happen to make history without reading it, usually make bad history. They cannot understand the undercurrents and the fundamental forces that really shape the course of events and determine the ultimate destiny of a nation.
In the absence of historical perspective, you and the like of you never perceived the roots and tendrils which gave rise to the current crop of separatism and subversion in Kashmir. Poisonous seeds were persistently planted in the Kashmir psyche. And these were liberally fertilised. Those of you whose obligation it was to stop these plantations and their fertilisation, were not aware of even the elementary lesson of history; to compromise with the evil was only to rear greater evil; to ignore the inconvenient reality was only to compound it; to bow before the bully was only to invite the butcher the next day.
I could cite scores of cases to support my contention. Here I would restrict myself to only two examples.
Softness and Surrender. On October 2, 1988, Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday his statue was to be installed in the new High Court complex at Srinagar. The function had been announced. The Chief Justice of India, R.S. Pathak, was to do the formal installation. But a few Muslim lawyers objected. They threatened to cause disturbance at the time of the function. The Chief Minister gave in, almost willingly, to the bullying tactics. The function was cancelled.
What are the implications of what happened ? A secular Kashmir, part of a secular India, could not have, even in its highest seat of justice, a statue of the Father of the Nation, of a sage, who laid down his life for communal harmony. Who was the person spearheading the move against the installation ? It was none other than Mohd. Shafi Bhat, an advocate of the J and K High Court and an active number of the National Conference, who was later on given party ticket for Srinagar Lok Sabha seat in the elections held in November 1989 and with whom you kept warm company during your visit to Srinagar on March 7, 1990, to create as many difficulties as possible for Governor’s administration.
At that time there was National Conference (F) Congress (I) Ministry in office. Such was its lack of adherence to principles, such was the character of Congressmen who formed part of the Ministry and such was its disposition to cling to power that not even a little finger was raised when the function was cancelled.
The bully’s appetite could not have been whetted better. Intimidation could not have secured better results. The troublemakers could not have perceived a more casual and non- committed adversary. Was it not natural for them to nurture higher ambitions and think that more spectacular results could be achieved by deploying a more aggressive and threatening strategy ? Only a naive would believe that in the context of the Kashmir situation, softness and surrender on basic principles would not act as an invitation to terrorism and militancy.
The Union Government enacted the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988. It was made applicable to all the States of the Union except J and K. Because of Article 370, concurrence of the State Government was needed for extension of this law to the State. But the same was not given. Why ? Because J and K is different what an argument for having a law which aimed at eradication of misuse of religious premises for political purposes.
Nowhere was this law needed more than in the State of J and K. Nowhere were religious places misused more than here. Nowhere were seeds of fanaticism and fundamentalism sown every Friday more assiduoulsy than from the pulpits of the mosques here. Nowhere was it preached more regularly than here that Indian democracy was un-Islamic, Indian secularism was un-Islamic and Indian socialism was un-Islamic. And yet, neither the State Government which was ruled by two supposedly secular parties, nor the Union Government took the matter seriously. What intrigued the most was that the law which was considered good for 100 million Muslims in other parts of India, was not considered good for 40 lakh Muslims of Kashmir.
What was the use of the nationalist forces ruling the country when they would not act in national interest at all, when they remained mental slaves of the politics of communalism; when they were inclined to place reliance on words and not on deeds; when they did not lead, but succumbed; when they encouraged, and not defeated, separatist elements; when, instead of building a new society strong in human and spiritual values, they did everything, wittingly or unwittingly, to repair, renovate and strengthen the old decaying and smelly sitadel of obscurantism; and when they invariably gave precedence to expediency over the basic goals and principles of our Constitution ? What could be the result of all this ? Did it require any unusual insight to understand where such fipurious forces would take us ?
I leave it to the well-wishers of the nation to consider, without any political or personal bias, a basic question. How was it that Dr. Farooq was calling me Hallaqu and Changez Khan, and you were travelling all the way to Srinagar to ‘expose’ me as anti-Article 370, anti-Kashmiri and anti-Muslim and, at the same time, Miss Benazir Bhutto was vowing to tear me to pieces – ‘Jagmohan ko Bhag-Bhag Mohan Kar Denge’ ?
There are many other facets of Kashmir’s truth which lie buried underneath the heaps of disinformation and also of superficiality and shallowness. These days I am busy in an attempt to remove some of these heaps. One day, I hope, the country will acquire the true perspective of the problem. The Kashmiri masses would also realise that I was their greatest well-wisher. I wanted to save them permanently from the exploitative oligarches and also from the machinations of religious ‘Czars’ and forces of obscurantism.
You have already committed the sin of letting down the Bharat Mata in Kashmir. Now do not add to it another sin of letting down the other Mata also. There is, after all, some power above. Conscious of her. She may condone your negligence. But she would not condone your sin of blaming an innocent person for what were your own faults, particularly when he had been persistently reminding you of your obligations.
So far as I am concerned, I am content with my gloomy pride of having done the correct thing in Kashmir. True, I seemingly and, perhaps, temporarily, lost the goodwill of some of the locals. But I was not seeking a certificate from anyone. I had gone for the second term to do a national duty.
The country’s polity and administration have assumed such a character that it has become incapable of solving from its roots, any serious problem. Elections have virtually lost all meaning. And these would continue to be meaningless until and unless Indian democracy and its constitutional structure acquires a healthy cultural base, a pure soul and soil, from which the seed of justice, truth and selfless service could sprout and blossom into a Great Tree providing shade and shelter from Kanyakumari to Kashmir. Currently, the inner light is gone, and we are being led virtually by blind men with lanterns in their hands. We stumble from one crisis to another. As a poet says: It has happened and it goes on happening  and it will happen again.

With best wishes, 

Yours sincerely, 
Jagmohan

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Hurriyat Truth Tapes

#ITFBlive Following the India Today Expose, the case against #BittaKarate has been reopened and he has been taken to an undisclosed location for questioning by NIA #HurriyatTruthTapes

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10155897714387119&id=23230437118

Thursday, March 9, 2017

It pays to be a separatist in Kashmir

The recent exposé of Syed Ali Shah Geelani's grandson getting a plum posting has once again exposed the working of an unimaginative,  thoughtless government in handling the Kashmir issue.

Over the years, it has become abduntaly clear that none of governments irrespective of the party they belong to have any vision, strategy or plan to resolve the Kashmir imbroglio. They have no expert for this conundrum.

There was a hope that with Modi government in centre and BJP in power in Jammu & Kashmir, there will be atleast  a clear thought process on the way forward.

But unfortunately, the BJP has continued with the policy that has plagued the Indian system for too long. The lack of vision and misconceived notions of Sangh Parivar (who is quite active in Kashmir issue) have taken situation from bad to worse.

The first thing that was expected out of Indian state after the new government took over was to stop extending favours to separatists in hope of winning them over. Second was to weed out the pro-seperatists government officials, act against them and atleast ensure that they are given postings that are insignificant, with very limited influence. Third, but very important was to keep heat on the seperatists by ensuring that legal cases against them are taken to their logical conclussion. And last but most important was to have people who are loyal to the state and government in key administrative positions.

All these basic principles has been grossly violated in J&K and today the whole nation is paying the price of this folly.

From offering MBBS seat to Syed Salauddin's son in early 90's to helping Asiya Andrabi's son get admission in Malaysia, to offering VIP treatments to anti-India rabble rousers, to the recent incident of giving a government job to Geelani's grandson, all show the government assumes their acts of foolishness as magnanimity.

It does not require even commonsense to see that the key postings in the Kashmir valley across government departments from judiciary to police department to horticulture to key educational institutions are with people who are seperatist sympathisers. Last year a senior police officer heading a very crucial post in South Kashmir was believed to have acted as a broker in a dispute that erupted between Abu Dujan of L.e.T and now dead Burhan Wani, who was then the head of Hizbul Mujahedeen in Kashmir. If sources are to be believed, even the death of Burhan Wani was not a chance encounter, but an attempt by a senior police officer to please his political bosses to consider him for the top role in his department. A DSP, who is now on deputation to another department was hired by Mufti government inspite of being a former deserter. He was supposedly hired on a recommendation of a well known separatist leader. By turning a blind eye to the background of these employees while recruiting and posting them on important postings after giving them a job – the field is left open for the anti-India elements in J&K to create an entire ecosystem that takes salary from government but works for seperatists.

Indian state over the years have always acted in a way that has always put the well wishers of Indian state or for that matter, people who supported Indian state for whatever reasons including personal or materialistic gains at risk. Ikhwanis, who almost wiped out the militancy in Kashmir (their approach and creation can be debated) were exposed and given almost as gift to be killed by ISI backed terrorists. Kashmiri Pandits, who have always been Indians from the core of their heart, enjoying tremendous respect (even by their adversaries) for their sincerity towards work have been denied job opportunities in Kashmir or sidelined when it comes to key positions in the state machinery. Even non Kashmiri speaking muslims, who form a sizeable population of the state and are largely seen as pro-India have been ignored and discriminated. All policies in Jammu & Kashmir are planned in such way that they are favourable to valley residents, especially to seperatist sympathizing population.

Multiple cases against terrorists and seperatist leaders are lingering in courts for decades. From henious crimes like murders, assassinations, rapes, to cases like sedition, hawala, assault on law officers have seen no closure. People like Yasin Malik, Bitta Karate, Syed Ali Shah Geelani and many others have virtually no fear of the law. In 2006, the TADA designated judge Mr.Wani while giving his judgement on releasing Bitta Karate said the following "The court is aware of the fact that the allegations levelled against the accused are of serious nature and carry a punishment of death sentence or life imprisonment but the fact is that the prosecution has shown total disinterest in arguing the case, which is in complete violation of Article 21 of the Constitution." Even after 27 years, there has been no progress in the case against Yasin Malik on the charges of killing 5 Airforce officers. Law in Kashmir today is not a deterrent but a great motivator, as it gives instant fame without any fear of punishment.

It is time that Indian state comes out of the delusian they can purchase peace. Because peace is not in the intrest of the people they  buy up from. For them conflict means money. The message in Kashmir is clear; if you want incentives
join the chorus "Hum kya chahte azadi"

https://rainaamit.wordpress.com/2017/03/08/%e2%80%8bit-pays-to-be-a-separatist-in-kashmir/