Who are more dangerous than Afzals and Kasabs?
| Source: News Bharati English Date: 2/9/2013 4:19:52 PM |
New Delhi, February 9: At last, Mohammad Afzal, Accused No. 1 in the Parliament Attack case is hanged to death! The person who was called ‘terrorist of the nation’, a Jaish-e-Mohammad man, and a terrorist who plotted the deadly attack on Indian parliament in 2001 was convicted in 2002 with a death sentence for the terrorist act. And after twelve years Afzal Guru is hanged on Saturday 9 February 2013 at the Tihar jail in New Delhi.
The designated Special fast track court gave its verdict in 2002 but it was challenged and a question of Human Rights of terrorists was thrown in society claiming that Guru is not given a fair trial. What happened in those 12 years? Why the death sentence was so delayed? Was Afzal Guru not awarded a fair trial? Was Afzal Guru not at all guilty in the Parliament attack case? Who are the people raising these questions and creating furore during all those 12 years until the President Of India and Home Minister made their mind to follow the Law ?
It is utmost important to understand the motives behind such unsolicited questions which creates confusion in the society and create distrust about Indian judiciary in the minds of common Indian. Surely, there are such elements in our Nation who always try to safeguard the interests of terrorists and anti-national forces as if it their only mission.
Parliament attack 2001
13 December 2001. Five terrorists breached the massive security cordon in Parliament House building around 11.45 am, firing from AK-47 rifles and hurling grenades. Both Houses were adjourned about 40 minutes before the strike, but several Union ministers and hundreds of MPs were still inside. Six secutity personnel died in fighting with terrorists. The attack was conducted jointly by the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM).
The court ordered that terrorists were – “heavily armed with automatic assault rifles, pistols, hand and rifle grenades, electronic detonators, spare ammunition, explosives in the form of improvised explosive devices viz., tiffin bombs and a sophisticated bomb in a container in the boot of the car made with enormous quantity of ammonium nitrate. The High Court observed: "The fire power was awesome enough to engage a battalion and had the attack succeeded, the entire building with all inside would have perished.”
Delhi Police picked Mohammad Afzal Guru, a member of terrorist outfit Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) from Jammu and Kashmir. In addition, professor from Delhi University's Zakir Hussain College S A R Geelani was picked up for questioning and was arrested later. Afsan Guru and her husband Shaukat Hussain Guru were picked up later for investigation of the deadly attack on Indian Parliament.
On 4 June 2002, charges were framed against four people - Afzal Guru, Geelani, Shaukat Hussain Guru, Afsan Guru and Prof. Geelani by the Special designated court which heard the case on day-to-day basis.
The designated Special Court was presided over by S.N. Dhingra, accused were tried on charges. The trial concluded within a record period of about six months in which 80 witnesses were examined for the prosecution and 10 witnesses were examined on behalf of the accused S.A.R. Gilani. About 300 documents were exhibited. Afzal Guru, Shaukat Hussain and S.A.R. Gilani were convicted for the offences.
On 18 December 2002, Court ordered death sentence to S A R Geelani, Shaukat Hussain Guru and Afzal Guru. Another convict Navjyot Sandhu aka Afshan Guru was let off.
High profile clemency campaign for Human Rights of a “Terrorist”
Immediately after the Courts verdict came out which sentenced Death penalty, Human Rights activists Arundhati Roy and Praful Bidwai came into action. Accusing Afzal Guru did not receive a fair trial and was subjected to a frame up of corrupt and inefficient police work, Human rights activists in various parts of India and the world demanded amnesty for Afzal Guru.
In Jammu and Kashmir, pro-Pakistan separatists like Hurriyat Conference (G) chairperson Syed Ali Shah Geelani warned Government of India of dire consequences if it decided to hang the Parliament attack convict Muhammad Afzal Guru. He also termed Guru a “hero of Kashmir”.
Guru belonged to Sopore from Baramulla district of Jammu and Kashmir. During his business venture Guru came into contact with one Tariq of Anantnag , who motivated him to join Jihad for liberation of Kashmir.
False outcry
Knowing that Afzal Guru was a close aide of Jaish-e-Muhammad leader Ghazi Baba and the Court has examined enough proofs against him, the so called Human Rights activists started foul cry pushing forward Guru’s wife Gulshan Guru portraying him a family man.
S.A.R. Geelani, who was grabbed and later acquitted in the case by Supreme Court sought reduction of the quantum of punishment awarded to Afzal.
Afzal Guru’s high profile mercy campaign tells the truth about moves of terror supporters who operate under the hood of human rights, which is equally gruesome considering the national security and integrity of India.
Arundhati Roy, the so called controversial activist and supporter of the barbarous Maoists and Pak endorsed Kashmir separatists, started attacking media and judiciary for 'bending the truth' to push Afzal to the gallows. In her article ‘Who needs Reality TV?’ Arundhati Roy claimed that evidence against Afzal Guru was not direct but only circumstantial.
Claiming that the Delhi Police special cell which investigated the Parliament attack case, was ‘spectacularly successful’ in getting both the print and electronic media to put out its entirely unsubstantiated claims as the ‘truth’, making it seem as though the impending judicial trial was just a formality. Further, she asks if ‘collective conscience’ the same as majority opinion? Would it be fair to say that it is fashioned by the information we receive? And, therefore, that in this case, the mass media have played a pivotal role in determining the final court verdict? If so, has it been accurate and truthful?
Arundhati Roy is no exception to human rights activists who like to portray India in a very negative manner before the globe. In her article “India’s Shame” published in The Guardian, Roy repeatedly used the term ‘real story of parliament attack’ raising several questions, which challenges integrity of the Government f India and Indian security and investigating agencies.
Creating perplexity about Supreme Court, Roy says, “Supreme Court judgment, with all its flaws of logic and leaps of faith, does not accuse Afzal of being the mastermind of the attack. So who was the mastermind? If Afzal is hanged, we may never know.”
Roy’s claims and questions not only harm the image of investigation agencies of India but also create distrust about the Judiciary in minds of common Indian.
Similarly, secular activist Ram Puniani who claims to work for communal harmony, also tried to raise suspicion about the Police and investigating agencies whick book Afzal Guru. “The base on which Supreme Court has given the judgment has been built by the police with methods which are questionable, which have also been reprimanded by the court in this case. The argument on the other side is that if Guru is not hanged it will be an insult to those who have laid their lives for defending Parliament,” Puniyani writes in his article published in 2006.
Similarly, in her article “Why Afzal Must not be hanged’ Nandita Haksar, Human Rights lawyer says that Hanging Afzal under the pressure of the Hindu Right-wing lobby would only endanger Indian security and would be a stigma on Indian democracy.
Here are the self-explanatory titles of articles supporting Afzal Guru:
- Media bending the truth to push Afzal to the gallows: Arundhati Roy, Hindustan Times, 23 December 2006
- India's shame: Arundhati Roy, The Guardian, 15 Dec
- Post-mortem of Afzal Guru Case: K. G. Kannabiran, President People's Union for Civil Liberties
- The Justice of Injustice: Ram Puniyani
- Afzal’s hanging will not be death in isolation: Inam ul Rehman, Combat Law, Nov - Dec 2006
- From Maqbool Bhat to Afzal Guru-Kashmir sees another son being hanged : Pervez Majeed, Kashmir Affairs
- ‘And His Life Should Become Extinct: The Very Strange Story of the Attack on the Indian Parliament’ Arundhati Roy, Outlook Magazine Oct 30, 2006
- A death sentence in India - Shubh Mathur , 22 October 2006, opendemocracy.net
- The great Indian Tamasha : M. Ashraf. Article, Greater Kashmir Online
- An appeal to save a life of Mohammad Afzal Guru, on the death row in India: Tapan Kumar Bose, South Asia Forum for Human Right
- Mi-Information campaign by Government: Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal, Executive Editor of Kashmir Times
- Guilty of unsolved crime: Mihir Shrivastav
- We haven’t even heard afzal’s story: Nandita Haksar
All those who gathered to ‘safeguard Human Rights of a terrorist were- Anand Patwardhan, Arundhati Roy, Noam Chomsky, Sister Helen Prejean, Harsh Mandar, S. A. R. Geelani, Sandeep Pandey, Justice Suresh, Gautam Navlakha, Ved Bhasin, Ziauddin Sardar Praful Bidwai, Ram Puniyani, Dionne Bunsha, Jyoti Punwani, Asgar Ali Engineer, Ammu Abraham.
For years, through the Mercy petition campaign, ‘Justice for Afzal Guru’, those most infamous individuals and self-proclaimed secular rights activists relentlessly worked hard to prove a terrorist non-guilty and blamed -the then NDA led Central government, the security forces, the police, investigating agencies and the Indian Judiciary- guilty for the death penalty for Afzal Guru. More than that, they also ran a campaign to revoke most effective anti-terror acts like ‘Prevention of Terrorism Act’ (POTA).
Now after Mumbai atttack villain Kasab hanged in November last year and Afzal Guru has been hanged on 9 February, it is interesting to know what those so-called rights activists will do and what will be their mission ahead to preserve human rights in India.
For any nation, Terrorists like Kasab, Hamza and Afzal Guru are dangerous but more dangerous are those who try to shield them and defend their anti national terror acts in the name of Human rights. In a fight against terrorism, such elements should also be treated as criminal and anti national.
Indian populace should understand this at once.
No comments:
Post a Comment