Unanswered Questions

Within days of the terrorist attack on Parliament on 13th December 2001, theNDA government initiated a full scale mobilisation for war against Pakistan,saying that the terrorists were Pakistanis sponsored by the Pakistan Government.That mobilisation brought us to the brink of a nuclear confrontation withPakistan, cost the public exchequer almost 10,000 Crores, led to the death ofabout 800 soldiers, over a hundred children and the loss of livelihood ofthousands of farmers living in the border areas.

The only evidence of the identity of the terrorists was the allegedidentification of them by Afzal to the police and his confessional statement.Afzal along with Shaukat, Afsan and Geelani had been arrested by the SpecialCell of the Delhi police, which claimed to have solved the case with remarkablespeed. Afzal’s confession along with Shaukat’s had been obtained by theSpecial cell before their DCP, since under POTA confessions before policeofficers became admissible in evidence.

The Supreme Court has however acquitted Geelani, Shaukat and Afsan of thecharges of conspiracy, blowing a gaping hole in the conspiracy story concoctedby the Special Cell, which was faithfully reproduced by sections of the mediaagain and again, even during the trial. The court has however convicted Shaukatof an entirely new charge of concealing knowledge of the conspiracy, though hewas neither charged of this offence, nor was there any argument in court on thisissue. The Court has also made unfortunate, unjustified and entirely uncalledfor remarks against Geelani, that because he laughed in a conversation with hisbrother, he must have approved of the attacks.

Afzal has been convicted of conspiracy primarily on the basis of statementsof police witnesses and seizures of materials from him shown by the police,which went unrebutted during trial, because Afzal was practically unrepresentedin the trial. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the court has acquitted 3of the 4 persons charged of conspiracy and has held that the manner andcircumstances in which the confessions were obtained, makes them unreliable.

However, it is only on the basis of these unreliable confessions that thethen government immediately committed the country to a full scale warmobilisation against Pakistan with the possibility that it might have escalatedto a nuclear war. The mobilisation was used by the NDA government for politicalpurposes. POTA was immediately enacted, and anti-Pakistan as well as communalfeelings were whipped up in the war hysteria which was drummed up takingadvantage of the attack on Parliament.

No attempt was made to properly identify the persons who attacked Parliament.Instead of a proper high level inquiry into such an enormous conspiracy whichshook the foundations of the republic, the government of the day was contentwith the facile and self-serving story concocted by the Special Cell and basedprimarily on confessions extracted by the Cell in their own custody, wheneveryone knows how such confessions are extracted. With the confessions setaside, we do not know the identity of the militants, though the then HomeMinster L. K. Advani said that they looked like Pakistanis!

Moreover, Afzal, the only person found guilty by the Apex Court ofconspiracy, is a surrendered militant, who was not only supposed to reportregularly to the Special Task Force of Jammu and Kashmir, but was also undertheir surveillance. How could such a person mastermind and execute such acomplex conspiracy? And how could a terrorist organisation rely upon such aperson as the principal link for their operation? On whose behest was he acting?Is there some credibility to his statement that both the leader of the attack,Mohammad, and one of the masterminds in Kashmir, Tariq actually belonged to theSpecial Task Force? And what of the Press report from Thane (Times of India,Pune edition, 26 December 2001; and also rediff.com, 20 December 2001) that 4terrorists including one Hamza (the same name as one of the terrorists killed inthe parliament attacks, identified by Afzal) had been arrested by the Thanepolice in November 2000 and handed over to the Jammu and Kashmir police forfurther investigation? Even after three judgements by the courts, thesequestions remain unanswered. It will be a travesty of justice to hang Afzalwithout ascertaining answers to these questions.

In any case, it seems clear that there has at least been gross negligence onthe part of someone in the Special Task Force for them to have been unaware ofsuch a conspiracy planned under their noses by a surrendered militant, who wassupposed to be under their surveillance. It is also clear that the Special Cellof Delhi police tried to frame at least three innocent persons. The High Courthad found the investigating agency guilty of producing false arrest memos,doctoring telephone conversations and illegal confinement of people to forcethem to sign blank papers. It is also clear that false confessions wereextracted by torture. All this, along with the serious questions that have beenraised by reputed civil liberties organisations about the encounter killingscarried out by this Special Cell, require that the methods of this rogue policecell, which functions as a law unto itself, be investigated and it be madeaccountable.

These are grave and momentous issues for the future of our democracy. Inthese circumstances, it is necessary that there be a full scale and in depthParliamentary inquiry into all these issues. The country must learn the truthbehind the attacks. Those guilty of negligence, concoction of evidence etc. mustbe held accountable. And above all, those who almost took the country to war insuch a reckless manner must be made accountable.

Nirmala Deshpande is Chairperson, Committee for Inquiry of December 13th.