Muzaffarnagar riots: A case of intelligence failure in more ways than one

While most of India was gearing up to cheer for their favourite team in the finals of Asia Cup, the state Assembly of Uttar Pradesh had a busy Sunday, when the Muzaffarnagar riots closure report was presented in the house.

In 2013, between August 27 and September 9, Muzaffarnagar and Shamli districts in western UP burned in communal violence. The riots left more than 60 people dead and tens of thousands homeless. The savagery spread to other parts of western UP and later, political parties like Bharatiya Janata Party left no stone unturned in its efforts to use the riots as part of its political play during the run-up to the 2014 elections.

After the riots were controlled, the state government of UP formed the Justice Vishnu Sahay Commission. It was to look into the administrative lapses that enabled the Muzaffarnagar riots. Retired Justice Of Allahabad High Court Vishnu Sahay was appointed the head of this one-member commission.

The Commission was supposed to submit its report within two months, but it took two years and 14 days to finally prepare it. After the commission was announced on 9th September 2013, it questioned approximately 377 people and of them, more than 100 were police officers. Although submitted in September 2015, the report was not made public then.

It still hasn’t been made public, but last Sunday, accredited journalists were allowed to attend the house when an Action Taken Report (ATR) was tabled by parliamentary affairs minister Mohammad Azam Khan. The ATR was based on the Commission’s 700-paged report, which looked into the incidents of communal disturbance and violence that happened in Muzaffarnagar, Saharanpur, Meerut, Shamli and Bagpat.

The commission has cited 14 reasons for the riots, but as far as the Bahujan Samaj Party and BJP politicians believed to be implicated are concerned, the report says they have been already charged with cases for initiating the riots. Therefore, the commission has no right to order any more action on them.

In short, the Commission exonerates the governing party as well as other political players, even though the Muzaffarnagar riots are the most horrifying examples of communal violence in India’s recent past.

Here are the people the Commission did hold responsible and the gaps in its logic.

Ground zero

The report says that on August 27, a Muslim youth named Shahnawaz and two Jat Hindu youths named Sachin and Gaurav were murdered in Kawal, Muzaffarnagar. The mishandling of these murders resulted in communal violence between Muslims and Hindu Jats.

The Commission also mentioned that there had been several incidents prior to this one in Muzaffarnagar and Shamli. All these threaded together to cause the riots that raged between August and September. Without naming any organisation, the Commission criticised social media and print media for the way the clashes were reported. However, no politician was held responsible.

Among the reasons for the Muzaffarnagar riots that the commission cites is the release of 14 Muslim youths who were detained for the murders of the Sachin and Gaurav. This move was apparently seen as the government favouring the Muslim community. According to the report: “Though the 14 youths set free by the police had no role in murder of two Hindu youths neither there was any suspicion on their involvement, but their release sent an impression about the state government’s perceived pro Muslim biasness and this impression quickly gained currency among the Jats that the administration was working under influence of Muslims.”

The report also said that the impression of favouring Muslims was strengthened when the then district magistrate Surendra Singh and senior superintendent of police Manjul Saini, on whose orders eight of the 14 people were picked up by police, were transferred.

Bad cops, worse intelligence

The report observes that the administration was unable to control the violence and the failure of local intelligence made the situation worse. In the primary enquiry, the Commission found the then Principal Secretary (Home) RM Shrivastava, Circle Officer of Jansath Jagat Ram Joshi, district magistrate Kaushal Raj Sharma and SSP Subhash Chandra Dubey responsible for the riots. But later, it concluded that bureaucrats Shrivastava and Joshi were going by the book and so could not be termed guilty.

The UP Police has a separate department for local intelligence within the state, known as Local Intelligence Unit (LIU). The report blames the riots on the LIU’s failure to gauge the situation. The LIU had reported that on September 7, it expected 15-20 thousand people to gather in the local panchayat of Nangla Mandaur. The actual numbers came to approximately 40-50 thousand. The failure of LIU’s Inspector Prabal Pratap Singh to provide accurate numbers has been held as critical since this panchayat meeting is believed to have triggered later violence.

According to the ATR, “The Inquiry Commission has held that prima facie the main responsibility for the riots goes to Prabal Pratap Singh. Hence there will be departmental action against him.”

The report also pinned blame on Dubey, who was sent to Muzaffarnagar immediately after the riots and was suspended after a fortnight. While the Commission held up Dubey’s suspension, it noted that Dubey and a few other officials did a lot of hard work to control the situation in Muzaffarnagar, Shamli, Bagpat and Saharanpur. Dubey will now face departmental action. When contacted by Newslaundry, Dubey declined to make any comments.

Political correctness

The report not only gave a clean chit to Akhilesh Yadav-led Samajwadi Party government, it even patted the backs of politicians from various parties, for “controlling” the riots.

That BJP MLA Sangeet Som had circulated a provocative YouTube video and falsely connected it to the death of the two Jat Hindu men was discussed in detail. However, “no further action would be taken against Sangeet Som who had uploaded a provocative fake video on Youtube which was shot in Pakistan until the investigation ends”.

So why were BJP politicians not questioned by the commission? In particular, BJP leaders Sanjeey Balyan (MP, Muzaffarnagar), MLAs Sangeet Som and Suresh Rana, Jat leader Virender Singh were not even summoned despite having been accused of being closely involved in the violence. The Congress has complained that the BJP and SP are in “cahoots” to absolve each other and the commission’s report only adds to the credibility of that claim.

Even though the report places the blame on intelligence failure, it does note where the administration failed in a few occasions. However, despite doing so, it does not hold the state government responsible. A few top officials are named, but the Commission doesn’t follow the trail to its logical conclusion (which would, inevitably, lead to the top brass in UP). When contacted by Newslaundry, Justice Sahay said that he did not want to talk about the enquiry report as it has not been made public so far.

Most importantly, after two years and 700 pages, we still have no clarity about who really is responsible for the carnage. More than 60 innocent people were killed in the Muzaffarnagar riots, but who killed them? Who rendered more than 50,000 people homeless? That we have no answers is an intelligence failure in more ways than one.