Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.pakistan
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 18:54:06 -0400 
From: "Arun K. Gupta" <ag3l+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: IV: Conflict: Role of administration


Continuation of :

Hindu-Muslim Conflict in India: Causes and Remedies

by Iqbal Ansari (Dept. of English, Aligarh Muslim University)
***

Along with the primary and permanent causes of communal tension there
are some secondary causes, proximate causes and immediate occasions
like the desire to uproot the Muslims from their lands, houses and
jobs; decision to teach them a lesson and make them behave; to polarise
society on communal lines to reap electoral benefits during the next
elections; to provide a respectable cover for anti-social activities by
members of both communities; to settle old scores -- political or
business -- with somebody or some section of the other community.

In spite of all these primary, secondary and proximate sources of
communal conflict and tension it should be possible to prevent, curb
and control the outbreak of communal violence if the political
leadership of the state and union govts. is clear in its mind that it
is its duty to do so and if such a political decision is carried out by
an administration which is equally sure, clear and firm about its
duty.

Occasional lapses owing to human error and inadequacy of the
administrative machinery, etc., might no doubt be expected, but not any
major holocaust. This conviction about the prevention and control of
communal violence is based on the following facts:

a) All those who are involved in loot, arson and killing, whether in a
planned or spontaneous manner, are not motivated people like terrorists
who would risk their life and limb for any `cause'.

b) The fear of being caught and convicted would act as a strong
deterrent.

It is this lack of clear-headed administration on the part of govt.
leaders as well as district adminstration which is chiefly responsible
for the failure of conflict-management, leading to major breakdowns
involving massive destruction of life, limb and property as at
Jabalpur, Ahmedabad, Bhiwandi, Nellie (Assam) and Meerut.

In Ahmedabad in 1969 the Chief Minister was asked by leading Muslim
citizens to clamp curfew immediately after a Muslim laundry shop was
set on fire, the first incident of its kind. The C.M. did not.

Later when things went out of control and decision was taken to call in
the Army, it was kept waiting at the district borders for 48 hours for
lack of clear instructions.

This writer was told by an ex-Minister, when he visited the place a few
months later, that the C.M. was initially rather sympathetic towards
the Hindus who were allowed to give free vent to their feelings. He was
afraid of the Jana Sangh making political capital out of it. Members of
the state security forces, before the arrival of the army, remained
passive spectators to scenes of arson, loot and killing. Whenever
approached by anyone for help they would say they had no orders from
`above' to do anything.
In Aligarh, during the 1978 riots, this writer again found that the
then District Magistrate (who was a member of the scheduled castes) was
on one hand heading a team of officials divided on caste lines, and on
the other, was receiving conflicting instructions from the state govt.
of the Janata party, a conglomerate of various factions and
ideologies.

In an investigative report on the Meerut riots of 1982 submitted to the
Minorities Commission, Mr. N.C. Saxena, the then Joint Secy. of the
Commission, says that on the murder of a Hindu drug addict under
circumstances where communal motives were not certain, the district
administration made up its mind to teach the Muslims a lesson, and
everything else followed from this decision.


Apart from this lack of clarity and determination at ministerial and
administrative levels and on occasions their own perversity, what
contributes to the recurrence of communal riots so frequently and
ferociously is the certain knowledge that hardly any guilty person has
been brought to book and convicted. Tens of thousands of people have
been killed in riots in free India, yet not even a single person has
ever been hanged or imprisoned for life. On the contrary, a very large
number of innocent citizens are harassed and victimized and falsely
implicated and put in prison on flimsy charges, or on mere suspicion
and trumped up charges.

***
[to be continued]
***
[The above is taken from "The Muslim Situation in India",
edited by Iqbal Ansari,  which is a publication of a seminar
held by the Institute of Objective Studies in New Delhi, July 4-5,
1987.

On May 22-23, 1987, there were riots in and around Meerut.
These cast a long and gloomy shadow on the deliberations reported
here.]
***
arun gupta
ag3L@andrew.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,alt.activism,rice.culture.indian