Condemn themA Muslim organisation says the recent violence at Azad Maidan needs to be slammed in the strongest possible terms; wants Muslim leaders to answer, makes a plea for responsible reporting and keeping the city's strained secular fabric from tearing
August 18, 2012
MUMBAI
Hemal Ashar
Mumbai teetered on the brink of large scale communal violence on August 11, 2012 as protests led by Muslim organisations turned bloody within minutes. The protests were to highlight what the organisations claimed were attacks against Muslims in Assam in the ongoing Bodo vs. Muslim conflict in the North Eastern state and attacks against the Muslim community known as the Rohingyas in Myanmar or Burma, as it was formerly called.
 No sight to behold: Smoke from burning vehicles engulfs the city’s landmark buildings as the protests spiral out of control. Pics/atul kamble
The protests turned violent due to incendiary speeches and the mob, which may have come prepared given the lethal rocks and weapons they carried, spun out of control torching media vehicles and attacking police officers. There was police firing and at least two people lost their lives but the police did manage to bring a smouldering problem under control after a few hours. The embers though are still burning and a fallout of that violence has sent tremors down the spine of this city. Elsewhere too, North Eastern residents are fleeing cities filled with trepidation of repercussions on them and there is palpable tension in the air.
 Making their point: (from left) Shakeel Ahmed, Asgar Ali Engineer, Hasina Khan and Javed Anand. Pic/Satyajit Desai
One of the reactions to this incident is the formation of a group called Muslims in Solidarity for Justice: Voices Against Violence at the Azad Maidan protest. This group, formed in response to the violence, held a public-press meet yesterday at Mumbai’s Press Club, which is, in fact, adjacent to Azad Maidan.
 Burning issue: Demonstrators gather after torching a vehicle
The group emphasised that Muslims in Solidarity for Justice condemned the violence at the incident and sought punishment for the guilty. That seemed to be the overriding theme of the meeting, where the four speakers on the dais collectively claimed that they could not condemn the violence enough.
 Carnage: A police van burns as mayhem at Azad Maidan spills over
Social media
Hasina Khan, who was described as a feminist activist and a member of the Collective Forum against Oppression of Women and Aawaz-e-Niswaan, took the mike first, stating, “We are against this violence and the organisations I represent have been working for peace for the past 30 years. We want to ensure that this will not happen again. We are against all injustice and violence and discrimination. There are certain SMS messages and MMSes doing the rounds, increasing the hate and fear. We have to investigate the source of these messages.”
Social media, in fact, came in for flak from most of the speakers who agreed it is a double-edged sword. While in certain cases it does increase awareness and keeps channels of communication open, irresponsible use of social networking also helps spread baseless rumours, drums up dangerous hate sentiments and creates communal mountains out of very manageable molehills.
Said Asgar Ali Engineer, a well-known voice in the community and founder member of the Centre for the Study of Society and Secularism, “The turn the protests took was unexpected and shocking. One never thought that things would pan out like this. However, one has to understand the atmosphere that was created pre-rally and the prevalent sentiments sweeping the Muslim community about Burma and Assam. Overall, Muslims were being fed with the sentiment that there is a ‘world wide conspiracy’ against them, and Assam and Burma were being used as catalysts for this.
They were being told that, there is a conspiracy against you in this world. I do not think the organisers wanted violence but the way they mobilised people for this rally, they did create an atmosphere in masjids etc. that was rife for tension and problems. In fact, there was some kind of internal competition within the Muslim community itself, over who could mobilise more people for the rallies and this may have led to the charged atmosphere they created pre-rally.
One protest was planned for Saturday August 11, which turned violent and there was another planned by yet another section of the community, for Monday, August 13 but was called off, after the Saturday problem. There were also posters put up in various places claiming conspiracy against Muslims.”
Police praise
Engineer also added that he has always been in close touch with what is happening in Assam and what is happening currently is a Bodo vs. Muslim clash not a Hindu vs. Muslim one. “Yet, a religious colour is being given to this conflict by vested interests and then, put that together with conspiracy theories, the community’s unemployment rate, lack of education and frustration which found a vent.”
Engineer praised the Police Commissioner and appealed to people that such clashes cannot be given a religious colour and religion makes the “people very emotional and then it is very difficult to control them. We have 1992-93 (riots in Mumbai) as an example. When people ask me about Mumbai, I say there is communal harmony in the city and 1992-93 was an exception. We have seen how violence claims innocent lives and the responsible go scot-free. There is also an onus on journalists to report responsibly and fairly. Muslims may be bearing the brunt of Assam but Bodos too have suffered,” finished Engineer who reminded everyone that 2014 is election year and much of this may be politically motivated with an eye on the elections.
It was dial L for leaders, for speaker Shakeel Ahmed, part of an organisation called Nirbhay Bano Andolan who laid the blame squarely at the Muslim leadership door. “We have to blame these leaders as they have pushed back the fight for justice. One can see there is a link between violence and justice.
The Muslim leadership gives precedence to such issues, instead of talking about evolution of Muslims who live in the city’s poorest, dirtiest pockets and thinking about their progress. We need these leaders to give us answers. On that day, August 11, I could feel the ‘poison’ seeping into the city. I saw several communal incidents. Instead of all these protests, the community needs schools for children and opportunities to go ahead. Muslim leaders need to think about that.”
Need answers
Shakeel’s words resonated with Communalism Combat’s Javed Anand who stated that, “sorrys by Muslim leaders will not do. We need answers.” Anand added, “The history of this city has shown that usually in cases like these, it is the police on one side and the minority on the other along with human rights organisations who criticise the police.” Anand cited examples like rallies against Salman Rushdie’s book, “Satanic Verses where there were clashes between the protestors and police and blood was spilled.
This time though the provocation was by Muslims and the police showed great restraint.” Anand also said that there were numerous SMS messages and MMSes doing the rounds. After scrutiny it was found that there was absolutely no connection between these MMSes and violence in Assam or Burma. He said that people who incited the protestors to violence, “already had a ready audience because this is the month of Ramzan and there were a lot of men in the mosques coming in to pray. Instead, they should have given the correct picture because Ramzan after all, is a time for ‘hosh’ not ‘josh’, it is time for prayer and patience.”
The operative word is calm and Anand stated that leaders have to come out and calm the community, restore confidence in the North East community and it is heartening that this is already being done in certain sections. “We have seen certain Maulanas standing with leaders in cities like Bangalore and asking them, tell us what you want to say to the people and calm them down. But I have also heard some right wing people are standing with sticks and worsening an already difficult situation.” Anand emphasised that Assam is not, “a Hindu vs Muslim issue, in fact it is a property issue, which is being given a communal colour.”
Anand passed on a message from the Assam Association of Mumbai to the people stating that the Association had explicitly asked him to “tell the press to report responsibly so that truth is not a casualty in this. Today, an Urdu newspaper has printed a long letter, which begins with the words Muslims are being murdered in town after town in India. I do not know how such irresponsible writing can be printed. Do they not have news editors, sub editors and editors looking at the same?” he asked.
Anand also cited the hate mongering going on through Facebook with various bogus ‘groups’ being formed to protect the North East people from some perceived “dangers.” Anand reiterated that there is a modicum of control in the printed press and television channels but there is no such editorial whetting on social networking sites, which are free to fan the flames of hate.
Right wing
Hasina, who had spoken earlier, then cast an eye on the larger issues that beset the community and said it is important to improve the socio-economic conditions of the community. She said, “Muslim women face the brunt of right wingers outside of the community and within the community too.”
Hasina added, “There are some dangerous ideas being propounded and creative liberty is being stifled. Certain groups say that Satanic Verses should not be read. Why should other people decide what we should read or not read? We are not Iran or Afghanistan. Even the fact that writer Taslima Nasreen was told to leave India, as she had to flee Bangladesh it goes against Muslim women. There has to be artistic freedom here. Muslim women are the worst of the deprived.”
The session was thrown open for questions where things got a little tetchy with a listener asking the speakers why they were not at the venue on August 11 to defuse the situation. They said that they did not know there was going to be violence. “How would we know that?” they asked.
Another question asked was that why are Muslims always bothered about what is happening outside in the world, instead with them in their own community, where the speakers themselves said that they are suffering from poor socio-economic conditions, lack of education and other problems. Hasina replied that having said that, “in a democracy people have a right to protest against something anywhere in the world.”
Another man said that he respected Engineer’s views but stating that there is a ‘reason’ for everything might just be seen as justification for the incident. “It is very, very important to de-link what is happening in Assam and Burma from what is happening on D N Road,” he said.
To a question about whether Raza Academy, one of the organisers of the protests should be banned, the speakers answered that by that yardstick, numerous organisations and political parties too should be banned. The speakers claimed that instead, Raza Academy should be made to pay for the damage to public property in the city along with others responsible.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mumbai riots exposed both English and Urdu press
Arup Patnaik’s exemplary restraint while controlling a manic mob was not worthy of praise for the English press. The national media’s handling of the recent Mumbai violence has left the Muslims frustrated, says JYOTI PUNWANI.
Posted/Updated Saturday, Aug 25 07:53:55, 2012
HERE’S LOOKING AT US
Jyoti Punwani
The media must be happy. They didn’t bring about Arup Patnaik’s transfer, but they certainly worked for it like they haven’t for any other police commissioner’s transfer. There have been other CPs who have been soft on rioting mobs; indeed, the record of Mumbai Police has been to let mobs riot--as long as those are led by the Thackerays or the VHP. These mobs have attacked innocent citizens only because they were South Indian or Muslim, or North Indian. But that hasn’t made the media see red. Even when the media itself has been the target of such mobs, the police have done nothing. But when Muslims riot? And don’t just riot, they attack the police and the Amar Jawan Jyoti, there must be immediate action. If 10 to 20 bodies aren’t lying around, felled by police bullets, if these Muslims aren’t taught a lesson, then a cop isn’t worthy of his gun. That’s the message the media sent to Muslims.
This was the first time the police were targeted by a violent mob without any provocation from the former. Normally, any time this happens, the police reach for their guns. As it is, when they see a stone-throwing Muslim mob, their first instinct is to fire. So the Mumbai Police Commissioner’s restraint is a first. He ploughed through the mob, went up on stage, appealed to the panicky Muslims gathered there to disperse peacefully to avoid a 1992-like situation, and promised them he would control his men. This too was a first. Hence both actions made news.
But news of what kind? Going through the Marathi press, one finds nothing but praise for the police for having controlled a manic mob that went berserk at 3 p.m. so well that by 6 p.m. things were back to normal. The English press however, found little to praise. Day after day, all the newspapers hounded Arup Patnaik with questions on his inaction, carrying obviously leaked confidential reports warning about the violence, publishing video grabs of him abusing a senior cop for having caught someone who was pleading his innocence… His explanation that he saw in his force’s eyes the same look he had seen in his men in December 1992, and remembering what happened then, he was more afraid of them going out of control than the rallyists, was obviously not good enough for the English press.
Another message came through the coverage of Raj Thackeray’s morcha held ostensibly to condemn the attack by Muslims on the police and the media. Except CNN-IBN and NDTV, every Hindi, English and Marathi channel covered the morcha live. The Times Now reporter was almost breathless with admiration. After the rally, the television channels found nothing wrong in the MNS chief addressing Mumbai’s cops as Maharashtrians and declaring his support for them as Maharashtrians. They found nothing wrong in his blaming the violence both on August 11 and in 1992-93 on “Bangladeshi and Pakistani Muslims who flock here from UP, Bihar and Jharkhand.’’ Even Nikhil Wagle, who has often been physically attacked by the Shiv Sena (when Raj Thackeray was one of its leaders), gushed about the “inclusiveness’’ of the MNS chief’s “Maharashtra dharm’’. The next day, the English press was less gushing, but nowhere critical.
Acrimonious
No wonder an Eid Milan attended by this columnist the day after Raj Thackeray’s morcha turned acrimonious very soon. Some of the Muslims there were waiting to vent their ire on the English media, for projecting the wrong persons as their leaders, for branding the entire community as terrorists, for ignoring the violence on them in Assam and Myanmar…
The first two complaints were valid. The Raza Academy is a paper outfit; its chief, Seed Noori, a fanatic and a rabble-rouser. Yet, he adorns the pages of English newspapers on December 6 every year, performing namaz on the streets. At other times he makes headlines spewing inflammatory stuff against Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen. The communal politics of his outfit resulted in two policemen being lynched in Bhiwandi in 2005. In the resultant firing, two Muslims died. He was one of the organisers of the August 11 rally which ended in violence. But here’s how the Indian Express described him after that: “Al Haj Maulana Saeed Noori Sahab’’--a title obviously taken from his website. Every second maulana has performed the Haj, so have riot victims and the scholar Asghar Ali Engineer. Never heard of them being called “Al Haj”.
The Times of India described his organisation as a “Sunni advocacy group’’, and theHT gave this headline: “We are progressive and peaceful: Raza Academy”. Al Haj Noori Sahab must be laughing all the way to the mosque (where incidentally, he doesn’t allow Muslims of any other sect to enter except his own)!
Indeed, the Times’ sympathy for the organisers of the rally didn’t stop at Saeed Noori. One report described the “agony’’ experienced by another organiser at the fact that he was being projected as responsible for the violence.
Here’s a strange coincidence. This dichotomy--organisers blameless, individual mobsters guilty--echoes the stand taken by the State Home Minister R R Patil who gave a clean chit to the Raza Academy on day two itself. That should have aroused some suspicions about the organisers’ link with the minister. Any knowledgeable Muslim would tell you how deep these links are. But which English reporter talks to ordinary Muslims?
The same papers found little worth reporting in a press conference called by Asghar Ali Engineer, Javed Anand, Hasina Khan and Shakil Ahmed, all of them well-known in Mumbai. The speakers condemned the rally’s organisers and asked that they be held responsible for the violence. Why were these voices ignored? Does the English press, as Muslims have always alleged, have a vested interest in projecting a certain image of Muslims--violent, fanatic, terrorist?
However, in one respect, the press (not all TV channels though) came out with flying colours. Themselves at the receiving end of violence by a communally charged mob, the English press deliberately refrained from playing up the communal nature of the attacks. The behaviour of some of the rallyists on their way back had a definite communal overtone to it. But the English press, and the city’s two main Marathi newspapers, Maharashtra Times and Loksatta, chose to ignore it, or just hint at it. This was probably done to avoid any backlash by organised Hindutva parties in Mumbai, and showed a praiseworthy sense of responsibility.
However, by going after the Police Commissioner for his so-called inaction on the spot, the English press displayed the opposite.
The English press also, through these tumultuous days, made it a point to publish Bal Thackeray’s opinions expressed in his newspaper Saamna. One can understand that the Shiv Sena’s take on Muslim violence is part of news. But when Shiv Sainiks indulge in mob violence, do we reproduce what the Urdu press says? Through these last 10 days, only the Times carried two small paras on the Urdu newspapers’ stand.
Victimhood
Not that reproducing what the Urdu papers wrote would have helped. Apart from a general condemnation in the beginning, the Urdu press took its usual “victimhood” stand. In their meeting with the Chief Minister, called by him after the violence, Urdu editors spoke of a police “witch hunt’’, “counselling for rioters, not punishment’’ and reminded him of the soft treatment given to Shiv Sainiks besides objecting to those arrested being charged with murder.
The Urdu papers knew well enough the communal behaviour of the mob, but wrote nothing about it. They knew also that a Muslim woman, disgusted with the rowdy behaviour of Muslim boys going to the rally, had gone to the extent of squatting on the railway tracks to stop them. A fantastic story. But not for the Urdu press!
Instead, the Rashtriya Sahara blamed the so-called national media for not highlighting the incidents in Myanmar and Assam. Urdu journalists know well enough how the entire north-east is ignored by the English media. Before the Assam violence, how much did the Urdu press cover Assam or Myanmar? Did they at least give as much (or as little) coverage to the north-east as the so-called national media has? Some of the rallyists--readers of Urdu newspapers --didn’t even know that Assam was a part of India.
The Urdu press coverage of the August 11 rally brought out some new “facts’’. The Mumbai edition of Sahafat, once edited by the radical journalist Sajid Rashid (who died last year), wrote that the rioters had their faces covered by handkerchiefs. No video or photograph shows this. Urdu journalists know all about the rally organisers’ links with the NCP; again, nothing was written about this. The only exception was a report on the English website run by Muslims, ummid.com. The reporter interviewed a range of Muslims, who criticised the organisers and also spoke about their political links. However, at the end of the report, the writer couldn’t stop himself from wondering whether the violence was not the work of “non-Muslim political workers, agent provocateurs… as common Muslims are not familiar with this kind of violent protest.’’ Indeed. Ask the photographers targeted, and they would tell you how communally motivated their assailants were.
Arup Patnaik saved Mumbai from burning
Jyoti Punwani | Agency: DNA | Friday, August 24, 2012
| |
How Mumbai's Azad Maidan and Bombay Police riots tell a different story alltogether
(There is one interesting,…)
MUMBAI: There is one interesting, and depressing, difference between the Maharashtra government's reaction to the recent Azad Maidan riot and a riot that took place in the city exactly 30 years ago, in August 1982.
That was the Bombay Police Riot, an unprecedented event that put the city through its worst riots in 12 years and which was, predictably, greeted by calls from MLAs for the removal of Julio Ribeiro, who had just taken over as police commissioner (PC). But the then chief minister, Babasaheb Bhosale of Congress, refused to give in to the demands since he knew, all too well, how Ribeiro had managed to contain a problem that could have become far worse. Arup Patnaik, who has just been unceremoniously removed as PC, also quite possibly saved the city from far worse on August 11.
Not Yet Time to Forget Bombay Police Riots of 1982
Some activists were looking to provoke a stronger reaction that could have led to further chaos. And by attacking Patnaik for 'doing nothing,' political parties like the two Senas would have relished the chance of such chaos in which they could retaliate.
But by choosing not to be provoked, and containing the riot despite the attacks on police personnel, Patnaik may well have averted a larger conflagration — and his reward has been his removal.
It is a dangerous example of politicians using the police to push their own agenda. This meddling of politicians with the police force was reinforced at Raj Thackeray's rally. The made-for-TV moment of a police constable in uniform grovelling before Thackeray confirms this strategy.
It is a profoundly dangerous one for Mumbai, as the riots following a crackdown on police unions in August 1982 show. Today it seems startling that a police union was allowed at all. The government, at both central and state levels became increasingly uncomfortable with police unions, which had devolved into an alternative power structure.
When Julio Ribeiro took over on February 25, 1982, that discipline and morale in the Bombay Police was on the point of collapse. Rebuilding it would have meant destroying the union — and since the Union government was looking at Bombay to be an example for police forces across the country, the matter had national importance.
The Ganapati festival proved to be the perfect cover. Ribeiro took into confidence only a handful of officers he could totally trust. One of them was deputed to draw up detention papers for the union leaders. It was only two days before the event that the plan was disclosed to deputy police commissioners who, as Ribeiro notes, had suffered a lot from the union, so their support was assured.
It worked almost perfectly. Ribeiro writes that only one of the around 50 union leaders, Shevale, was suspicious — and the chaos he was able to unleash was an indication of how bad it could have been if all the others had known as well. On the night of August 17, when the officers went into action to arrest the leaders, Shevale gave them the slip and managed to contact people in Naigaum and Worli where there were large police colonies.
In one activist's memory, the problem spiralled out of control there because, for some reason, water supply to the Naigaum police colony was cut off. This agitated the women and children of the policemen, and they started altercations that rapidly became violent once news of the arrests spread. And when it became known that the police were off the streets, agitators of all kinds, including random looters, joined in, ransacking shops and burning vehicles. For a few hours, in parts of Bombay, a small civil war raged between the paother rioters.
But Ribeiro had planned well (it helped that he had spent six years in the CRPF and knew how to handle interactions between paramilitary and regular forces). Union leaders were soon in jail, sapping the organised protest and the presence of the Army on the streets calmed citizens. Ribeiro also went on TV to explain why the unions had to be taken down and since most people had suffered from small abuses from policemen, there was no sympathy from them. Even the mill workers didn't join in.
That event, 30 years ago almost to the date, make what happened on August 11 and the response from politicians like Raj Thackeray unnerving. Because, the rhetoric Thackeray had used, eulogising ordinary policemen and attacking their officers, is an echo of that disturbing past. And it's too early to forget 1982.
One force, two reactions: In controlling 45,000, police show what they could’ve done on Aug 11Top cop Arup Patnaik may take action against Raj Thackeray | |
Tuesday, 18 December 2012
The Best News is No Headlines
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment