Syyed Mansoor Agha analyses the ever rising trend of mob violence and incidents of lynching in the light of the Supreme Court directive to the Government at the Centre to enact law to stop mob violence and lynching.
On Friday (July 20) during the discussion on the no-confidence motion, in Lok Sabha, the issue of mob-violence was repeatedly raised by members. From the Government side, the impression was given that it is not something new or fast increasing.
Before discussion on the no-confidence motion, a member raised the issue of attack on Swami Agnivesh in Jharkhand in broad daylight and also referred to the rising trend of lynching all over the country. In his reply, UHM Rajnath Singh tried to pass the bug on state governments, saying it is a state issue. He also tried to insulate his government failure by referring to the 1984 incident. He asserted, “The 1984 anti-Sikh riot was the “biggest” such incident and so the Congress “should not preach us on the issue and stop shedding crocodile tears.” It is unfortunate that a heinous trend of crime, spreading fast all over the country, and injuring the health of society, is being justified by another crime of the past.
The data shows the sudden spurt in mob-violence after the NDA came to power in May 2014. In two previous years, only two stray incidences were reported. In 2014 11 persons were injured in three incidents; none was killed. In 2015 incidents rose to 12, killing 10 and injuring 34. In 2016 they killed eight persons and injured 58 in 24 incidents. In 2017, 37 incidents of mob lynching took place, killing 11 persons and injuring 152 others. The most alarming rise was reported in the first half of 2018. At least 33 people have been killed in 69 incidents so far. This data is compiled by various NGOs. No official data is available as NCRB had not yet started compiling specific data on mob-violence and lynching.
It is regrettable that while mob attacks, killing and lynching people having dissenting views, had become the order of the day, the government is not serious besides issuing oral or written soft advisories. UHM cannot absolve himself by uttering, “We have asked the Chief Ministers to take firm action against the culprits.” Sir, where is the action according to your instructions, especially by the CMs of states ruled by your party?
As he informed the House, the first advisory was issued in 2016 and the second in 2018. However, the rise of 50% in lynching incidents in 2017 over those in 2016 shows the advisory and condemnation without firm political will were only an eye-wash. Otherwise what will you say when you see leaders of the ruling party standing with and garlanding the culprits, addressing meetings and supporting rallies to incite people against the rule of the law, trying to protect the accused of illegal confinement, gang-rape and killing. Such activities are not an aberration but rather it has become a trend. Various State and Union ministers are seen indulged in emboldening the rapists, killers, and lynchers and weakening the cases against them in courts of law.
First, Union Minister Mahesh Sharma went to pay respect to Ravi Sisodia, an accused in Mohd Akhlaq lynching case of Dadri. Mr. Sharma attended his last rites and his coffin was draped in the National Flag as if the accused were a national hero. Another Union Minister Jayant Sinha travelled to Hazaribagh to garland seven convicts in Aleemuddin lynching case who had come out on bail with the active support of party leaders. The party leaders were racing to take the credit of bailing them out from the jail after they had been condemned for life. Mr. Giriraj Singh, yet another Union Minister, followed Mr. Sinha and went to meet Nawada communal violence accused in jail and lent them his moral support. Senior Minister and former BJP Chief Gajendra Gadkari finds nothing wrong in such immorality. He brushed aside the objections, saying everybody has a right to meet anyone. What an irony! Prime Minister Narendra Modi condemned vigilante violence, not once but twice in his public speeches but allowed his ministers to pat the backs of the accused and the convicts.
The attack reportedly by the activists of youth wings of the BJP on Swami Agnivesh was justified by a Minister of the State, Mr. CP Singh. He invoked the theory of provocation and blamed Swami’s ideology for attack. He held him as a ‘fraud’ and ‘hypocrite’. Several other BJP leaders have also been justifying such mob crimes. Gujarat pogrom of 2002 is a glaring example.
Justifying mob attacks and killing the persons of other thought and faith is not merely an issue of law and order, especially when people in power are involved. It is certainly an ill-intended political activity. In such a case Mr. Rajnath Singh’s saying that “the responsibility to prevent such attacks was with the state governments” and putting blame on social media for the spread of fake news, is ridiculous. What has stopped the ruling party to expel such ‘leaders’ from the party and shut down the shops of such media?
The data shows that most cases of mob-attacks were reported from the BJP ruled states. And in almost all cases the accused went scot-free; if arrested, got bail easily. Instead, cases were filed against the victims. Deflecting the issue on States is not at all the solution. Being the party in power at the Centre and in most states, BJP cannot absolve itself from the responsibility.
So there are two questions. One, when the government enacts the law as directed by the Supreme Court, and the other, will the political priorities of the ruling party change to help in reducing mob violence?
The Apex Court asked the Parliament to enact a law to strictly deal with such offenders and said, “Horrendous acts of mobocracy cannot be allowed to become the new norm and has to be curbed with iron hands.” The Apex Court also passed a slew of directions to provide “preventive, remedial and punitive measures” to deal with offences like mob violence and cow vigilantism. Reminding that no citizen can take law into his own hands, the Apex Court reminded that it was the duty of the State to ensure the rule of law is preserved. The trial courts were also directed to give maximum punishment in such cases.
We welcome the Supreme Court directive, but suspect whether it will serve the purpose without the political resolve to shun the present trend. As Prof Faizan Mustafa pointed out, “It is not a gap in the law that is the only problem. The (big) problem is that those who commit these crimes know that there is impunity. They know that not only they will not be punished, but that they will also get some political favours because of the ideology of some political parties.
“The message that we are not going to tolerate such violence must come from the top. It will have a much greater impact than changing the law. Because the no law in itself will be able to change the mindset of people.” (As quoted by Viju Cherian on moneycontrol.com)
Even after the L.S. discussion, no political will seems emerging out to curb this tendency and use of fake news for wrong objectives. Let me turn to Martin Luther King Jr. who said, “Non-violence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man but you refuse to hate him.”
When we look over the dominant political discourse of today’s India, unfortunately, it emerges that, “India is taking a quantum leap in the wrong direction” as Nobel laureate Amartya Sen said. He said, “This leap is in the direction of exclusion.” That means fundamental rights of life, speech and livelihood are in danger. As Rahul Gandhi said, the very existence of our Constitution is under stress. It looks true as the rule of connivance is on the rise and rule of the law on the decline.
Who is being excluded under this policy of “exclusion”? As Mr. Sen observed, “Mobocracy and despotism make people live in fear. It affects our liberty and democracy.” The targets are only poor, downtrodden and non-Hindu minorities, Dalits, SCs and STs.
The Supreme Court directed, “It shall be the duty of the government to take steps to curb and stop the dissemination of irresponsible and explosive messages, videos and other material on various social media platforms which have a tendency to incite mob violence and lynching of any kind.” The SC also said, “Any failure on the part of the police or district administration to comply with its directives will be viewed as deliberate negligence and/or misconduct.”
With due respect, let’s say, the police or bureaucracy can do wonders, as was done in Alimuddin Lynching case, which resulted in the conviction of 11 persons to life term. They fail only by the pressure and manipulation of politicians who even go to the extent of influencing the judiciary.
[The contributor is a senior journalist and civil rights activist; [email protected]]