There is a growing clamour in India to punish those guilty of the 1992-93 riots that v
ictimised the Muslim community. But unlike those accused of the bomb blasts, will the guilty here be brought to book? Was the Mumbai police polarised, pressurised or simply patronised by the political class to carry out their sinister strategies? Why have the policemen, who behaved in a partisan manner during the 1992-1993 riots not been punished till date? Leave alone punishing the guilty, what has the Mumbai police done towards de-communalising the force & introducing professionalism?
In an atmosphere of communal polarisation, what does one expect from the police? The guardians of
‘public good’ are expected to be non-partisan; diligently douse the fires of bigotry & display compassion for the victims. And what happens when the police fails to meet these constitutional & of course, the moral obligations? In short-term, such a behaviour flares up the passions, leading to gruesome atrocities against the community failing to find favours with the protectors. In the long-run, the social fabric of the nation suffers an irreparable dent. This heinous crime was committed by the Mumbai police during the 1992-93 Mumbai riots, where the Muslim community was systematically allowed to be butchered at the behest of saffron-clad politicians. Recollecting the police apathy & insensitivity during the riots, Prabhat Sharan, Senior Editor, The Free Press Journal told B&E, “I & a colleague of mine was sitting with a high ranking police offi - cer & we heard police personnel on the wireless jocularly stating, Mandir Wahin Baneyenge and Udhar Landiya (a derogatory term for Muslim) ko marne ki report hai, zara dekh lo. The police officer did not know what to say he just sheepishly grinned.” The evidence of this, rather obnoxious behaviour of the Mumbai police is adequately documented in the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Commission report on Mumbai riots of 1992-93. These facts have recently been corroborated by a leading television news channel in India, which has released the wireless messages of the policemen, exposing them as accomplices in the brutalization during that period. Explaining the police behaviour Prabhat Sharan added “We cannot say the entire police force is communalised but then a section of it does carry the germ of hatred towards Muslims in their bosoms.” Now, if a section of the police force only carries the germ, it leads us infer that Mumbai police has been deeply infiltrated by communal elements belonging to the majority community & it is this section of the Mumbai police, which acted at the behest of their political masters instead of following the lawful command of their senior officers. And if this is true, then what happened in 1992-93, surely constitutesa mutiny in the police force.
For Complete IIPM Article, Click on IIPM Article
ictimised the Muslim community. But unlike those accused of the bomb blasts, will the guilty here be brought to book? Was the Mumbai police polarised, pressurised or simply patronised by the political class to carry out their sinister strategies? Why have the policemen, who behaved in a partisan manner during the 1992-1993 riots not been punished till date? Leave alone punishing the guilty, what has the Mumbai police done towards de-communalising the force & introducing professionalism?In an atmosphere of communal polarisation, what does one expect from the police? The guardians of
‘public good’ are expected to be non-partisan; diligently douse the fires of bigotry & display compassion for the victims. And what happens when the police fails to meet these constitutional & of course, the moral obligations? In short-term, such a behaviour flares up the passions, leading to gruesome atrocities against the community failing to find favours with the protectors. In the long-run, the social fabric of the nation suffers an irreparable dent. This heinous crime was committed by the Mumbai police during the 1992-93 Mumbai riots, where the Muslim community was systematically allowed to be butchered at the behest of saffron-clad politicians. Recollecting the police apathy & insensitivity during the riots, Prabhat Sharan, Senior Editor, The Free Press Journal told B&E, “I & a colleague of mine was sitting with a high ranking police offi - cer & we heard police personnel on the wireless jocularly stating, Mandir Wahin Baneyenge and Udhar Landiya (a derogatory term for Muslim) ko marne ki report hai, zara dekh lo. The police officer did not know what to say he just sheepishly grinned.” The evidence of this, rather obnoxious behaviour of the Mumbai police is adequately documented in the Justice B.N. Srikrishna Commission report on Mumbai riots of 1992-93. These facts have recently been corroborated by a leading television news channel in India, which has released the wireless messages of the policemen, exposing them as accomplices in the brutalization during that period. Explaining the police behaviour Prabhat Sharan added “We cannot say the entire police force is communalised but then a section of it does carry the germ of hatred towards Muslims in their bosoms.” Now, if a section of the police force only carries the germ, it leads us infer that Mumbai police has been deeply infiltrated by communal elements belonging to the majority community & it is this section of the Mumbai police, which acted at the behest of their political masters instead of following the lawful command of their senior officers. And if this is true, then what happened in 1992-93, surely constitutesa mutiny in the police force.For Complete IIPM Article, Click on IIPM Article
Source : IIPM Editorial, 2007
An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative
An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative
No comments:
Post a Comment