Jun
4
Pogrom Survivor Describes Harassment and Resolve to Give Full Statement in Court
June 4, 2004 | Comments Off on Pogrom Survivor Describes Harassment and Resolve to Give Full Statement in Court
Rehana Vora is a key witness in the Ode case arising from the 2002 Gujrat pogroms against Muslims, in which 27 people were killed, including members of her family. She has stuck by her statement despite harassment by perpetrators and attempts to bribe her:
Rehana says she has been threatened with dire consequences by the accused, all of whom are out on bail. She was even offered a bribe of Rs 25 lakh. But that has only strengthened her resolve to fight on.
The Ode massacre is one of 10 riot cases in which the state government has been indicted by the Supreme Court and in which its petitioners are seeking trial outside Gujarat.
In addition to her resolve to give her statement and her promise not to turn hostile, Rehana stated that two perpetrators escaped India:
“I cannot understand how the accused managed to get bail in spite of the evidence. I hear that Natubhai Patel, who is the prime accused in the case, has escaped to the United States. How can one explain this when an accused isn’t even allowed to cross the state border?” she asks.
Interestingly, all the 95 accused in the massacre have been granted conditional bail by Anand additional sessions judge BM Modi.
Rehana has refused police protection, preferring a low-key lifestyle where her address is not revealed.
In other related news, the new chief justice of India R.C. Lahoti was sworn in yesterday. Today, he justified the Supreme Court’s intervention in the cases arising out of the 2002 Gujarat pogroms against Muslims:
In an interview to The Hindu on assumption of office, Mr. Justice Lahoti said the Supreme Court had risen to the occasion in dealing with the cases in the discharge of its constitutional obligations and duties….
Asked about the criticism of judicial activism, he said: “Judicial activism is a misnomer. The judiciary is supposed to be active under the Constitution. The day it is not active, it ceases to be judiciary.”
Justice Lahoti highlighted the favorable impact of public interest litigation, whereby any citizen, with sufficient interest and knowledge, can bring a case to redress public injury:
“We only make the legislature or the executive wake up and make them to do what they are supposed to do.”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.