NATIONAL POLITICS

Kalpana Sharma

On Shiv Sena and the Constitution

The courtroom dramas in New Delhi have eclipsed to some extent the equally significant events that have been taking place in the precincts of the Mumbai High Court.

The venue of the drama has been the courtroom where the revived Srikrishna Commission is investigating the cause of the communal riots that irrevocably scarred Mumbai in 1992-93.

The Shiv Sena-BJP alliance ruling Maharashtra had arbitrarily wound up the commission in January this year. The provocation was the beginning of the cross- examination of a senior Shiv Sena functionary, now an MP and leader of the Sena's parliamentary party. Mr. Madhukar Sarpotdar.

Mr. Sarpotdar has the dubious distinction of having been apprehended by the army at the height of the riots, while travelling with seven others in a jeep during curfew hours. In the jeep were two unlicensed pistols, two choppers, two hockey sticks and two other sticks. For this he was arrested but released with a few hours.

A month later, on February 6, he was arrested again, for making provocative statements which the police held could incite communal hatred. Some of the quotable quotes recorded including this one: "Innocents have been killed in Behrampada. If you think Hindus are impotent, we can also kill".

Mr. Sarpotdar (was) called to testify again. His testimony has caused more than a few ripples in a city.

The most significant of Mr. Sarpotdar's statements, for what it reveals or rather confirms about the Shiv Sena's philosophy, is his justification of retaliation as a policy, the ancient eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth dictum. Asked whether newspaper reports about Shiv Sainiks attacking Muslim-owned shops and homes in retaliation for an incident in which a Hindu family was burnt alive in Jogeshwari on January 7 were true, the Shiv Sena MP said: "It is true that this was in retaliation for what had happened at Radhabai Chawl, Jogeshwari and elsewhere. According to me, it was justified. If somebody attacks my house, I must defend. Retaliation is the only way. What other way can there be, in order to defend, than to retaliate?" When the judge asked Mr. Sarpotdar whether this theory of retaliation held good for his party as well, the latter answered in the affirmative. The fact that neither Chief Minister. Manohar Joshi, nor Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray, has contradicted Sarpotdar is indicative. Thus, here we have a lawmaker stating that it was perfectly justified for citizens to take the law into their own hands at will.

Sarpotdar was apparently afflicted with selective amnesia about virtually every event about which he was questioned. He even insisted that the Shiv Sena had not issued any directives to its cadres about participating in the kar seva at Ayodhya.

When he was shown an editorial in the Saamna, Shiv Sena's official mouthpiece, exhorting Shiv Sainiks to join the kar seva in large numbers, Sarpotdar claimed that the newspaper did not reflect the official party policy!

Sarpotdar also insisted that he did not know whether the Babari Masjid was a mosque. Here is his statement on that issue: "The stand (of the Shiv Sena) on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babari Masjid dispute was that the Ram mandir was there at the place where Shri Ram was born at Ayodhya and we did not know whether the structure there was a masjid or not".

One cannot dismiss lightly some of the statements- made by the Shiv Sena MP in the course of the Srikrishna Commission hearings. For one, they indicate a complete disregard for the rule of law. Shiv Sena is a ruling party in Maharashtra and is actively working with its electoral ally, Bharatiya Janata Party, to capture power at the Centre. Its commitment to and understanding of the Constitution must be seriously questioned.

There are other indications that the Shiv Sea subscribes to a similar disregard of the law.

A recent example is its response to the Ramesh Kini case. It publicly demonstrated its disapproval of the High Court ruling by urging its cadres to hold maha-artis on the Anant Chaturthi Day. Although the maha-artis turned out to be a mild affair, compared to the massive gatherings during the 1992-93 riots which resulted in organized attacks on Muslim enclaves, they were an extraordinary and blatant demonstration of the party's lack of respect for courts or the rule of law.

None of these developments’ augurs well for the future of the Shiv Sena-BJP alliance in the State. The only salutary fallout of Sarpotdar's testimony is that it has woken up a somnolent media to the existence of the Srikrishna Commission. For apart from his testimony, the Commission is exposing many important aspects of that unfortunate period in the city's life. Different police stations, for instance, (which) has clearly shown the complacency and complicity of the police.

Justice B.N. Snikrishna will probably have his report ready within the first quarter of 1997. The real test will lie in how his findings are acted upon. The people (who are) include those who were party, directly or indirectly to (the disturbances).

(Source: The Hindu, 11 October, 1996)