Delhi Riots: Report finds Police complicit in varying degrees, BJP leaders, minister fueling hate against anti-CAA protestors

New Delhi: A report on Delhi riots by he Constitutional Conduct Group (CCG) has held the Union Home Ministry  responsible for the failure of authorities to curb the 2020 North East Delhi riots that followed anti-CAA protest and also found the Delhi police that works under the Ministry guilty of  ‘complicity of varying degrees in the violence.”

The  report prepared a Committee the group comprising retired judges and civil servants called for a Court-Monitored Investigation by an agency other than the Delhi Police, which is not under the direct control of the Ministry of Home Affairs.

The independent panel also noted that leaders of the ruling BJP and some Government functionaries played a great part in creating an atmosphere of hate against Muslims and projecting their  ”socio-political’ assertion as a threat to Hindu identity, and a large section of the mainstream electronic media, especially six most watched TV channels mirrored the politicians’ hate narrative directed at anti-CAA protesters and Muslims, beginning from December 2019 and continuing into 2020.

”Speeches, statements, and slogans by BJP functionaries, prominently Kapil Mishra and Anurag Thakur, characterized the protesters as traitors, enemies, and violent troublemakers, within a divisive Hindu-Muslim binary. Calls for violence against those labeled traitors, through the “goli maaro” slogan, were repeated by political leaders in election rallies, public demonstrations, and mass gatherings, with no censure. The Delhi High Court described specific prominent speeches and utterances by political leaders as within the ambit of the crime of hate speech,” the committee said in its report.

The Committee conducted an empirical analysis of the messaging of sections of the television media around the CAA and the protests. This focuses on episodes aired in December 2019-February 2020 of primetime shows of the six most viewed television news channels. These were Republic and Times Now (English), Aaj Tak, Zee News, India TV, and Republic Bharat (Hindi). We also examined relevant posts on various social media platforms. The analysis reveals that the channels’ reportage of events surrounding the CAA framed the issues as “Hindus versus Muslims” with prejudice and suspicion against the Muslim community. These channels concentrated on vilifying anti-CAA protests, fanning unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, and calling for their forcible shutdown.

Hindu nationalist figures such as Yati Narsinghanand and Ragini Tiwari, as well as local BJP party workers, further spread the hate messaging through social media platforms. Facebook, WhatsApp, and YouTube were widely used.

Based on the material examined, this Committee found that the prevalence of hate significantly contributed to creating a climate in which a significant section of society became receptive to incitement and calls for violence against the Muslim community.

The Committee also found Election Commission, media regulatory bodies, and the Delhi Police lacking in adequate response to curb hate-mongering that only exacerbated such a climate. There were significant warning signs of impending violence – the shooting attempts on anti-CAA protesters – that went unheeded.

While indicting the Delhi Police, the Committee pointed out that ”as per the constitutional scheme awarding special status to the National Capital Territory of Delhi, the MHA, has the effective control of Delhi Police. Moreover, the MHA also oversees central paramilitary forces. With these crucial roles, the Central Government holds the primary responsibility to protect the lives and property of the people of Delhi. Despite all the resources at its command, the MHA’s interventions failed to contain the violence in North East Delhi. Repeated assurances by police top brass and government officials that the situation was under control did not match the pace and visibility of violence on the ground.”

”Considering the institutions present in Delhi, both state and central, and the ease of movement for security forces, it is a legitimate expectation that a situation of communal violence in Delhi should be averted and promptly contained. The very fact that mass violence took place over four days in a district of the nation’s capital city – the seat of both the Government of India and the Government of Delhi – indicates glaring failures of constitutional duties.”

The report also questioned Delhi Police invoking UAPA in FIR 59against 18 accused persons. The UAPA, being a special law to counter-terrorism, unleashes an extraordinary set of harsh conditions on the accused persons. . It must be cautiously invoked only in cases where alleged meet the definition of terrorist acts backed by sufficient proof. This Committee has
considered the question of applying UAPA in FIR 59 very carefully.

“The prosecution’s case is that the accused persons in FIR 59 conspired to execute riots as a means of forcing the government to repeal the CAA. This Committee has found no material produced through the current investigation that supports the allegation that the said alleged criminal acts constitute a terrorist act. Even if one was to assume that the alleged conspiracy led to the present violence, it disrupted public order. There is copious jurisprudence, some of it excerpted in Chapter 9, illustrating the difference between actions breaching public order and those affecting the security of India, the latter being a foundational condition for invoking the UAPA.”

The members of the CCG prepared the report after visiting  some of the riot-affected areas and later wrote to the President of India asking for a judicial inquiry.

One of the members Dr. Meeran Chadha Borwankar, IPS (Retd.), submitted a “Dissent Note” on May
4, 2022. The “Dissent Note” reads:

“. Having gone through all the material with the committee and information from different reliable
sources, I believe that a part of the anti CAA protests could have been orchestrated by anti-national
and hostile foreign forces, though major segment of the agitation consisted of spontaneous response
of a community that felt alienated and discriminated against. Deeper enquiry into it is called for.”

The Dissenting member also wrote: ‘ I do not agree to the very generalised inference that ‘police complicity with Hindu mobs, were contributing features of the violence’. However, I do not rule out some cases where police complicity with Hindu mobs did contribute to violence. To paint all police officers of Delhi police to be ‘complicit with’ Hindu mobs would be extremely unfair and unjust.”

The group of retired judges and civil servants present in the Citizens Committee comprised Justice Madan Lokur, a former judge of the Supreme Court. (Chairperson) Justice A.P. Shah, former Chief Justice of the Madras and Delhi High Courts and former Chairman, of the Law Commission of India, Justice R.S. Sodhi, former judge of the Delhi High Court Justice Anjana Prakash, former judge of the Patna High Court, G.K.  Pillai, IAS (Retd.), former Home Secretary, Government of India,  Dr. Meeran Chadha Borwankar, IPS (Retd.), former Director General, Bureau of Police Research and Development, Government of India, Dr. Meeran Chadha Borwankar withdrew from the Committee when its work was nearing completion.

-INDIA NEWS STREAM