Communal Riots-2011.pdf - Indian Social Institute

How they reacted to SC verdict (7)
The victim survivors and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) welcome the judgment passed by the
Supreme Court. Teesta setalvad of the CJP said, "While the prayers in petition was for the registration of
an FIR against chief minister Narendra Modi and 61 others and transfer of the investigations to CBI, the
order of the court goes far beyond this and in fact directs the SIT to chargesheet all the accused on the
basis of our complaint and submit all reports of the SC-driven investigation including the SIT reports,
Amicus Curiae Raju Ramachandran's reports to the magistrate's court hearing the Gulbarg case trial. She
said that the order also shows that the complainants have been given full locus to be heard "and make
our case whether the SIT decides to drop some of the accused or if the magistrate decides to file a
closure report. The victim survivors and CJP hope that the SIT will now undertake its job professionally."
Father Cedric Prakash: "The Supreme Court today directed the trial court in Gujarat to accept the final
reports of the SIT and of the Amicus Curae and also to continue with the process of law. This verdict
might be interpreted as a setback and disappointment for the victims of the Gujarat carnage of 2002 and
for those fighting for justice," said Father Cedric Prakash, director of Prashant - A Centre for Human
Rights, Justice and Peace. He also said that the verdict in no way gives a clean chit to Modi, nor does it
close the judicial process on this matter. Besides, the SC still has nine other cases to deal with on the
carnage of 2002. While some are also claiming 'victory,' the fact is that the struggle for justice will
continue relentlessly, with full faith in the judicial system and a hope that truth will ultimately triumph.
Gujarat Pradesh Congress Committee president Arjun Modhwadia termed the verdict of the SC, for which
the BJP is rejoicing, as a 'slap' in the face of chief minister Narendra Modi. "The verdict does not mention
that the SIT has failed to get any clinching evidence against Modi. The verdict has actually gone against
Modi and his officials. He said that the SC has directed the magistrate that before coming to any
conclusion or filing any closure notice over the complaint of CJP and Zakia Jafri, the complainants have
to be heard. Modhwadia claimed that the SC verdict was a victory for the complainant at a time when no
agency in the state refused to take the complaint. "The SC verdict has exposed those who are running a
campaign to malign Gujarat. The SC while giving a clean chit to Modi has accepted the findings of SIT
which has also found no evidence against the CM," said BJP state president R C Faldu. Faldu said that
the verdict has not only given a clean chit to Modi, but it is a statement that the state government is
committed to ensuring justice to the victims. He claimed that those who are conspiring against the state
have been exposed in the SC judgment. He stated that the SC has not only denied the request for a CBI
inquiry, but has also upheld the verdict of the SIT. (Times of India 13/9/11)
SC hands off, Modi hand-wringing in BJP (7)
New Delhi, Sept. 12: The Supreme Court today left it to a Gujarat sessions court to decide whether chief
minister Narendra Modi should be prosecuted in a riot case dealing with the deaths of 69 people in 2002.
Although the court did not make any observations on the merits of the case, the BJP claimed victory and
set in motion manoeuvres that appeared to have been driven by an assumption that Modi may now dust
off his prime ministerial aspirations. If Modi does throw his hat into the ring, the BJP, which has several
leaders eyeing the top post, is certain to go through a churning. ( ) The apex court also decided not to
monitor the case, which relates to the killing of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri and 68 others in Gulbarg
Society, any further. However, the three-judge bench made the rare gesture of incorporating in its order
the rights of the complainant, Jafri’s widow Zakia, saying the case against Modi cannot be closed without
hearing her. Lawyers and rights activists said the apex court’s refusal to decide the matter was not a
clean chit to Modi as his supporters were claiming. “This is the due legal process. The case against Modi
is initiating, not ending,” said lawyer Mukul Sinha. Some lawyers pointed out that the Supreme Court did
not either hand over the case to a court outside Gujarat or direct that an FIR be lodged. Neither did it ask
for a further probe by the CBI. However, others said such decisions are incumbent upon how the trial
court conducts itself while considering the evidence. Soon after the verdict, Modi tweeted “God is great”
while Zakia told reporters she was “extremely disappointed”. Later, however, she and Citizens for Justice
and Peace, the NGO that has been supporting her, welcomed the verdict. The top court had earlier asked
a special investigation team (SIT) to “look into” a complaint by Zakia that Modi had conspired and abetted
the massacre in connivance with ministers, bureaucrats and senior police officers. Today’s judgment
came after the SIT, which had questioned Modi for nine hours in March, apparently said the evidence
against him was not conclusive enough to send the case up for trial. The amicus curiae (a lawyer acting
as “friend of the court”) too is believed to have said the charges need to be probed further before a
decision can be taken. The court, without going into the contents of the SIT’s or amicus curiae’s reports,