Delhi Police Invesigation Of 2020 Riots Cases Skewed, Role Of Those Who Made Hate Speeches Ignored : Citizens' Committee Report

A report released by a Citizens' Committee consisting of former judges and a retired civil servant has indicted the Delhi Police, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the Delhi Government for their failures in handling the communal riots which took place in North East Delhi in February 2020.

The report titled "Uncertain Justice: A Citizens Committee Report on the North East Delhi Violence 2020" is authored by a committee which consisted of former judges Justice Madan B. Lokur(ex-Supreme Court judge), Justice AP Shah(ex-CJ Delhi HC), Justice R.S. Sodhi(ex-Delhi HC judge), Justice Anjana Prakash(ex-Patna HC Judge) and former Union Home Secretary G.K. Pillai IAS.

On Delhi Police

The Delhi Police failed to take punitive measures against hate speeches made by political leaders and others in the run-up to February 23 or on the day itself. Allegations of police assisting mobs and participating in attacks on Muslims, anti-CAA protest sites, and mosques have been documented, in eyewitness, media and affected persons' accounts. The Committee has obtained a limited, but credible mass of information indicating abject police failures, including apparent police complicity, of varying degrees in the violence. This requires investigation through an independent process, possibly a court-monitored investigation.

The report noted :

"On February 24, multiple instances of apparent police complicity were reported: police were seen with mobs attacking the anti-CAA protest site in Chand Bagh; firing tear gas at the tent housing the anti-CAA protesters in Kardampuri; encouraging mobs pelting stones and vandalising a store with a Muslim name in Yamuna Vihar. The police allegedly assaulted Faizan (leading to his death) and four other Muslim men in full public view on 24 February – a prime example of abuse of police power driven by prejudice. There is documented testimony and video footage of police appearing to beat worshipers and the muazzin of Farooqia Masjid in Brijpuri on February 25."

Delhi Police investigating in riots cases appear skewed

The Committee noted that the Delhi Police has registered a total of 758 First Information Reports (FIRs) pertaining to the violence during the riots. The report referred to various orders passed by the Courts which highlighted the lacunae in the investigation.

"Trial courts while granting bail in the IPC cases have also commented on the incongruity of the prosecution narrative in cases where Muslims have been accused of joining members of the Hindu community in beating Muslims. This Committee notes that the police have neglected to investigate the role played by those who made hateful speeches (many of which amount to the crime of hate speech) and gave calls to mobilize for discharging violent acts, in close proximity to the onset of violence.

The Committee concludes that the overall direction of the investigation appears skewed. It omits to examine the connections between the outbreak of the violence with the spate of hate speeches and calls for violence. It, incongruously, subjects anti-CAA protesters to a UAPA prosecution for allegedly committing violence which ultimately targeted Muslims, and those protesting against the CAA. Only an impartial and rigorous investigation can shed light on the truth, ensure accountability, and do justice to the victims of the violence".

Larger Conspiracy Case

The Committee also referred to the larger conspiracy case (FIR No.59 of Delhi Police Special Unit) in which several student leaders and anti-CAA activists were arrested under UAPA charges for alleged conspiracy behind the riots.

Regarding this case, the report stated :

"The Committee finds that the foundation of the prosecution case – the allegation of an overarching premeditated conspiracy aimed at orchestrating communal riots – is based on unexplained, belated statements which are inherently unreliable in law. A comparison of the investigation in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) FIRs with the investigation into the same allegations in FIR 59 reveal a number of contradictions and inconsistencies. These further cast a shadow on the claims made in the first chargesheet. It is the Committee's view that if the core of the prosecution case bears the taint of tutoring and fabrication, this taint looms large over the entire investigation"

The Committee has also raised concerns about the application of UAPA, terming it "unjustified".

Failure of Union Government in preventing riots

"The response of the Government of India, namely the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), was wholly inadequate. Despite having command over both the Delhi Police and the central paramilitary forces, the MHA failed to take effective steps to stem the spread of communal violence. Repeated assurances on February 24 and 25 by police top brass and government officials that the situation was under control did not match the visibility of violence on the ground. Though internal alerts circulated by the Delhi Police advised increased police deployment in North East Delhi on February 23 itself, official data shows that deployment rose only on 26 February. It appears that the numbers of police personnel were not increased on 24-25 February, even though the maximum number of distress calls were received by the Police Stations in North East Delhi on these days. This Committee concludes that the Central Government's failure to respond to the violence demands a serious examination. A comprehensive, independent review of the body of known intelligence, total police and other security force strength, and sequence of deployment across affected areas during the days of violence, is urgently required"

Government of Delhi

"The Committee also finds that the Government of Delhi did precious little during this entire time to mediate between the communities, even with the sharp warning signs in the lead up to February 23. Recognizing that the Delhi Government's ability to control violence was impeded with the police under the Centre's political control, the Committee feels that it failed to exert the role of civic mediation and statesmanship to calm the situation. Further, the Delhi Government has failed to ensure timely and adequate relief and compensation to those affected by violence. Approval of compensation by the government and the Claims Commission is riddled with delay; where decisions have been made, there are concerns regarding the quantum of compensation not being commensurate to the harm suffered".

On TV Channels

Referring to Republic TV,Times Now (English), Aaj Tak, Zee News, India TV & Republic Bharat (Hindi) and stated that these channels ran programs with anti-Muslim prejudice and communal hatred while reporting CAA protests. The whipping up of the communal frenzy by the channels resulted in the builld-up of hatred in the months preceding the riots. The channels' reportage of events surrounding the CAA framed the issues as "Hindus versus Muslims" with prejudice and suspicion against the Muslim community. These channels concentrated on vilifying anti-CAA protests, fanning unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, and calling for their forcible shutdown.

The report is available here