|
GUJARAT'S DIRTY HARRY
By M H AHSAN
Gujarat had, it would seem, worked extremely hard to shed the stigma of the 2002 post-Godhra riots. Its chief minister, Narendra Modi, has never failed to extol the achievements of his state at various fora, and is often even tempted to compare Gujarat with China, Japan and Germany in terms of the progress it has achieved. But there are multiple points of assessment when it comes to measuring a state in a democracy.
Gujarat may have impressive growth, enviable infrastructure, and an efficient administration. But certain departures from established norms can render its claims to being a progressive state empty of all meaning. How, for instance, can it presume to be well governed if its senior officers are allowed to stage encounter deaths in the full knowledge that they will not be questioned or brought to trial? Police officers like D.G. Vanghara and his cohorts, believed to have masterminded the liquidation of Sohrabuddin Sheikh and his wife, could have operated with such impunity only with active political cooperation, even patronage. They, in turn, emerged as demi-gods within the police force, whose every word became a command for those lower down the line.
The emergence of the Dirty Harrys of the Indian police in recent times, officers prepared to adopt extra-judicial measures to achieve their ends, is a disturbing phenomenon made worse by the manner in which they have been glamourised, even glorified, in films, books, and the news media. The aura built around these larger-than-life figures blinds both the politician and the public to the unconstitutionality and unacceptability of their actions and ends up normalising what are, by any token, extremely grave and brutal crimes.
The only redeeming aspect to the Sohrabuddin Sheikh saga is that the brother of the dead man could petition the Supreme Court. This is tribute to the wisdom of the Constitution, which allows the country’s highest court wide advisory and appelate jurisdiction. The apex court is accorded — thanks to Article 32 — the power to intervene in matters concerning the enforcement of fundamental rights. Given the multiple failures of a system that can allow incidents like encounter deaths to take place and then get conveniently buried, it is once again to the Supreme Court that the country looks for correction.
|
|
EDITORIAL
