Backpage

THE outcome of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, despite George Bush’s assertions to the contrary, remains uncertain. The expectation that a concentrated spell of aerial bombardment would rapidly bring the Taliban regime to its knees and force them to hand over Osama bin Laden has evidently not materialised. But what it has managed, in addition to adding to the number of civilian casualties, further destroying the already decimated infrastructure of a ravaged land, creating a humanitarian crisis of unimaginable proportions and fuelling a global Islamic rage, is to embolden statist and right-wing forces in different societies into regrouping and consolidating themselves.

The recent moves by the BJP led NDA are a clear reflection of the times ahead. As a first step, ostensibly as part of a strategic crackdown on ‘terrorist’ forces, the government decided to impose a nation-wide ban on the Student Islamic Movement of India – SIMI. True, there is little agreeable about SIMI. Some of its leaders have made no secret of their admiration for Osama bin Laden. Others, taking a cue from the intemperate Shahi Imam of the Jama Masjid, have supported the call for a jehad. But, instead of making a focused case against particular individuals, a blanket ban and mass arrests of its student activists is only likely to feed into growing Muslim disquiet, if not violence.

Not too far back, the Rajnath Singh government in U.P. decided to knock off a large number of Muslim voters from the electoral rolls, a move which elicited sharp comments from the Election Commission. More recently, activists of the youth wing of the party, as part of their celebratory kick-off of the state assembly elections, decided to vandalize the Taj. Needless to add, the central leadership did nothing to admonish its exuberant supporters.

Nothing, however, has stoked the communal embers more than the assertions, and by the prime minister, not the VHP, that construction of the Ram Mandir will begin by next March. Seen in conjunction with the certificates given to the Bajrang Dal as a patriotic and nationalist force, even turning a blind eye to its ‘armed’ training camps, no further proof is required that the moderate phase of the BJP, governed by the coalition dharma of the NDA, is now drawing to a close.

Equally contestable is the decision to bring in the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTA), and that too a mere fortnight before Parliament was to re-convene. Surely, since TADA lapsed way back in 1995, the government could have waited to discuss such an important move in Parliament. Expectedly, in civil liberties circles, this decision was greeted with dismay, with critics fearing a bringing in of the earlier draconian legislation by the back door. If anything, despite official assurances that the new ordinance builds in sufficient safeguards against possible abuse – relaxing the unduly restrictive provisions vis-a-vis bail and ruling as inadmissable any confession made to a police officer below the rank of SP as also for the confession to be confirmed by a magistrate – the fear remains that the intention is to curb even legitimate dissent.

Critics, and this includes the NHRC, point out that TADA was flagrantly misused, surprisingly, or not so, in states not affected by terrorism (Gujarat/Maharashtra); that an inordinately large number of detainees happened to belong to minority communities; and that the conviction rate was an abysmal 2.5%. Worse, over 85 per cent of the cases which were brought to trial were thrown out by the courts for insufficient evidence. Surveys of the country’s largest jail, Tihar, showed that an overwhelming majority inside were either undertrials or those under preventive detention. Since the new law seeks to target ‘the intent of threatening the unity and integrity of the nation as also those with information that could prevent a terrorist act or help apprehend suspected terrorists’, it is much too wide in its ambit, and anyone, including journalists who follow terrorist groups, can be picked up.

There is little doubt that in these extraordinary times states may require extraordinary measures to tackle the threat of terrorism, particularly organised terror. September 11 and after have once again highlighted the fragility of democratic polities. Even those who subscribe to the view that effective resolution can only be political, will agree to this. Their fear, and justifiably so, is that further accretion to the powers of the state without addressing the known infirmities of the criminal justice system, will only add to abuse and worsen the problem.

These are difficult times, a period which demands that our political class rises beyond its narrow and sectional interest to address crucial national concerns. Unfortunately, the proclivity for quick electoral and symbolic gains runs far too deep. That remains our real tragedy.

Harsh Sethi