TERRORIST ATTACKS :
A. Legal Response
B. Prevention and
C. Convictions
The five year rule of the UPA Government has witnessed an unprecedented proliferation in terrorist activity. This alarming increase is by itself indicative of the fact that the Indian state under the UPA has become a soft target for devastating attacks by terrorists both foreign and of the home grown variety. Not unpredictably, the UPA Government has been on the backfoot on the issue of terrorism throughout its five year reign.
In the face of a barrage of criticism in Parliament and the press, the stock response of Congress spokespersons in particular, has been to point fingers at the previous NDA regime in an attempt to demonstrate that the predecessor Government’s record on terror is no better than that of the present regime. In particular, the Congress defense has three planks at its core :
A. that the NDA regime witnessed three major terrorist activities on Indian soil in the Kandahar hijacking in December, 1999; the attack on Parliament in December, 2001 and the attack on Akshardham Temple Complex in Gujarat in September, 2002;
B. That draconian laws did not deter terrorist activities as is evident from the fact that the Akshardham attack took place within a few months of the promulgation of POTA; and
C. That the NDA’s response to these attacks and the Kandahar hijacking was pusillanimous in the extreme and that the UPA would have dealt with the situation with a far greater degree of efficacy.
PREVENTION : On the issue of frequency of terrorist attacks, there is virtually no contest in so far as the record of the two regimes are concerned. While the NDA era witnessed three major terrorist attacks, the following is the list of the major strikes that have become so conspicuous a feature of the UPA Government’s tenure:-
New Delhi , Oct 29, 2005 : 61 persons killed in three blasts on the eve of Diwali
Varanasi, March 7, 2006: 21 people killed and over 101 injured in two blasts that rocked Varanasi, the first at Sankat Mochan Temple and the second at Varanasi Railway station.
Mumbai, July 11, 2006: 7 explosions ripped through crowded suburban trains in Mumbai killing 209 persons and leaving 700 more bloodied and injured.
Malegaon, Maharashtra, Sep 8, 2006: 40 people killed in two blasts and about 200 injured in 4 explosions in the Hamidia Mosque and chowks.
Samjhauta Express, Feb 19, 2007: 66 people killed after two firebombs went off on the India-Pakistan friendship train, the Samjautha Express, at Panipat, North Delhi.
Hyderabad, Aug 25, 2007: 42 people killed in two blasts, at a popular eatery and a public park.
Jaipur, May 13, 2008: 68 people killed in serial bombings.
Bangalore, July 25, 2008: One person killed in a low-intensity bomb explosion.
Ahmedabad, July 26, 2008: 57 people killed after 20-odd synchronised bombs went off within less than two hours.
New Delhi, Sep 13, 2008: 26 people killed in six blasts across the
New Delhi, Sep 27, 2008: Three people killed after a crude bomb was thrown in a busy market in Mehrauli.
Malegaon, Maharashtra, Sep 29, 2008: 6 persons killed and about 101 injured after a bomb planted on a motorcycle exploded.
Modasa, Gujarat, Sep 29 2008: One killed and several injured after a low-intensity bomb kept on a motorcycle went off near a mosque.
Kanpur, Oct 14, 2008: 8 people injured after bomb planted on a rented bicycle went off Colonelganj market.
Imphal, Oct 21, 2008: 17 killed in a powerful blast near Manipur Police Commando complex.
Assam, Oct 30, 2008: At least 45 killed (figure can change) and over 100 injured in 18 terror bombings across Assam.
Mumbai, Nov 26, 2008: 180 killed and many more injured in seven terror attacks targeting mostly foreigners' in the Taj Mahal Hotel, the Oberoi Trident Hotel, Leopold Cafe, CST, Chabad House and in random firing elsewhere by ten individuals armed with weapons, ammunition and grenades.
LEGISLATIVE RESPONSE : On the issue of strong laws to deal with the detection and prevention of terrorist activity and the trial and punishment of terrorists, the Congress stand discloses an unconscionable mix of both double standards and vote bank politics . Confronted with Sikh terrorism in Punjab and the assassination of its own Prime Minister by her Sikh body guards-both outcomes of Congress’s dangerously misconceived policies in Punjab-the Congress’s visceral reaction was the enactment of TADA, first by ordinance in 1985 and then by legislation in 1987. The Congress party’s civil libertarian pretensions found no public expression as TADA remained in force for well nigh 10 years. Meanwhile, convictions under the act were rare and when they did take place the ordinary law would have been adequate. On the other hand, thousands of innocent Sikh youth suffered the rigors of the statute through unwarranted arrests, illegal and protracted incarceration and custodial violence. Through all this, there was no whimper of protest from any Congress quarter.
In fact, Congressmen first discovered their revulsion for draconian laws in the wake of the Bombay serial blasts in 1993 as a consequence of which large number of Muslims, particularly from Mumbai, were arrested and sought to be tried under the TADA.
Congress M.Ps like Sunil Dutt commenced an indefatigable campaign for the repeal of TADA. On the eve of the 1995 parliamentary elections, Narsimha Rao’s Government allowed TADA to lapse.
In the wake of the Kandahar hijacking, and particularly the attack on Parliament in December, 2001, the NDA Government in 2002 enacted the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA). While it is true that a few months later in September, 2002 there was a terrorist attack by Lakshar-e-Toiba militants at the Akshardam Temple in Gandhinagar, Gujarat, this was the only terrorist incident for the rest of the NDA regime after the enactment of POTA. The failure to check the Akshardam attack in spite of POTA is explained by the fact that the Akshardham conspiracy was well under way by the time the police could invoke the extraordinary powers that POTA gave them for the early detection of terrorist crimes through wire tapping and the interception of letters, e-mails, etc.
Ominously the only exception to the otherwise terrorism free reign of the NDA Government’s post POTA was the city of Mumbai in Maharashtra where the Congress-NCP Government was in power. Between Dec. 2002 to August, 2003, Mumbai was convulsed by as many as six terrorist bombing episodes in a span of eight months that left several persons dead and many more seriously injured. .
From December 2002 to August 2003, as the following terrorist incidents occurred:-
Dec. 2 2002: Two persons were killed and 31 injured in a powerful explosion in a bus outside the crowded Ghatkopar railway station in Mumbai. The Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) was suspected to be behind the blasts.
Dec. 6, 2002: Twenty five people were injured in a bomb blast by members of the SIMI at McDonalds fast food restaurant at Mumbai Central railway station. The bomb was planted in the air conditioner duct. It was suspected to be a crude bomb.
Jan 27, 2003: Thirty persons were injured when a bomb planted on a bicycle went off throwing splinters of sharp nails outside Vile Parle railway station in Mumbai. Members of SIMI were found to be behind the attack.
March 13, 2003 : A powerful bomb blast shattered a bogie of a local train at Mulund railway station in Mumbai during peak hours killing 11 people and injuring more than 65 .
July 28 , 2003 : Bus blast kills 3 and injures 31 others in Mumbai. Pakistani intelligence agency : ISI and members of SIMI were found to be behind the blast.
August 23, 2003: Two bombings at the Gateway of India and the Mumbadevi temple in Mumbai killed 52, injured 167. Terrorists from Lashkar-e-Toiba and the Students Islamic Movement of India were found to be behind the attacks.
In sharp contrast to its response to terrorism in Punjab, the Congress vehemently opposed the enactment of POTA and made its repeal a part of their manifesto and campaign during the elections that ensued in 2004. Immediately on its assumption of power as a part of the UPA, the Congress introduced legislation for the repeal of POTA, although it retained some of its provisions through an amendment of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention), 1967.
Since that repeal, terrorism has been in spate through the length and breath of India. The UPA, however, remained undeterred about its stand on strong terrorist laws. It was only the stark horror and humiliation of 26/11/2008 that forced the UPA to grudgingly accept the utter folly of its previous ways. On 17.12.2008 the Home Minister, Mr. P.C. Chidambaram, introduced two bills to effectively deal with terror which subsequently became law. The first, an amendment to the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, substantially reintroduced all the earlier repealed stringent provisions of POTA. After five bitter years of struggling with terrorism, the UPA Government effectively bowed to the NDA’s legislative wisdom on terror.
CONVICTIONS : Congress’s attempts to defend its own abject record on terrorism by pointing to the earlier NDA’s Government record is both specious and misconceived. Its most stringent criticism of the previous regime centers around the Kandahar hijacking episode. According to the Congress, the NDA’s response was effete; the Congress would have effected the policy of Zero Tolerance and never allowed the hostage exchange of Masood Azhar for the passengers. This stand of the Congress constitutes an astounding volte face : contemporary newspaper reports of December, 1999 indicate that an all party meeting was held to discuss the Kandahar hostage crisis. At the said meeting there was unanimity amongst all parties that the Government of the day should handle the crisis in a manner that ensured the safety of all the passengers aboard IC 184. In fact it was categorically resolved that the safe return of the passengers to Indian shores should be the prime objective of the Government. The Congress delegation at the all party meeting, which endorsed this action, was led by Manmohan Singh. Neither Sonia nor Rahul Gandhi nor any other functionary of the Congress party opposed this line of action. Indeed contemporary newspaper reports disclose that both Sonia and Rahul were conspicuously silent on the issue. In stark contrast, the statements issueed by both in more recent times are critical of the approach of that Government.
More significantly, Masood Azhar whose release from captivity was at the centre of the hijackers demand, had been in custody since 1994 when he was arrested in Kashmir for terrorist activities. For five years the Congress Government and the subsequent Government which depended on Congress support for its survival, failed to secure Masood Azhar’s conviction on any charges in any court of law. Instead of trying and executing him for sedition, two successive Governments allowed him to languish in captivity, thus almost facilitating the audacious attempt for securing his release in a hostage exchange. The hijacking of IC 184 in December, 1999 was essentially motivated by the objective of securing Masood Azhar’s release. Those who did not secure his conviction and execution for five years were largely to blame for the Kandahar hijacking and its consequences as also for the several terrorists crimes attributed to him since 1999, including the attack on Parliament in December, 2001. Congress spokesmen have conveniently concealed these material facts.
As regards the 2001 attack on Parliament, the record of the NDA Government is exemplary to say the least. The attack on Parliament was thwarted - albeit by the sacrifice of the lives of a few brave security personnel. While the five terrorists who tried to gain entry into Parliament were killed, the masterminds behind the plot were traced and arrested. The trial of these persons was completed within a year. The Appeals of the convicted persons as well as those of the state against those acquitted - both before the High Court and the Supreme Court were finally disposed off by 4.8.2005.
The Supreme Court dismissed the Appeal filed by Mohamed Afzal Guru and confirmed the death sentence imposed upon him. For almost four years this sentence has not been carried out as a mercy petition filed by Mohamed Afzal Guru is pending disposal by the President of India. The exemplary method of dealing with terrorists demonstrated by the NDA Government, thus stands completely vitiated by delays attributable solely to the UPA Government.
The indecision of the Government is in stark contrast to the speed and alacrity on its part in hanging Kehar Singh one of the alleged conspirators in the assassination of Indira Gandhi.
The culprits in the Akshardham Temple complex attack have also been apprehended, tried and convicted; only their appeals are pending.
On the other hand, there is a marked reluctance on the part of the Congress/UPA Governments to detect and punish the perpetrators of terrorist crimes. It took 14 years for a Special TADA Court dealing exclusively with 1993 serial bomb blast case to convict the guilty. The judgment in that case was delivered only in 2007. Almost all those found guilty have filed appeals and doubtless, a few more years will elapse before they get their just desserts.
In the six blast explosions that shook various parts of Bombay between December 2002 and August 2003, the accused in one case have all been acquitted (though an appeal against their acquittal is pending in the High Court). In the case of three other explosions, the trial is still to commence and in the remaining two, although the trial has begun, they are some way from completion. In all these cases, the accused persons are members of SIMI, the Lashkar-e-Toiba and Pakistani Nationals. In short six years after these blasts, no one has been convicted by a court of law.
Finally, as regards the epidemic of terrorists attacks that have been the hallmark of the last five years of the UPA Government, in some cases the perpetrators have not even been apprehended. Where there have been arrests, the trials have not yet commenced. Even the case of Ajmal Kasab, a Pakistani terrorist caught red handed with volumes of evidence disclosing his role in the several terrorist acts perpetrated by him on 26.11.2008, the charge sheet filed by the Crime Branch consisting of 2000 witnesses and several documents, threatens to undermine a speedy and efficacious trial. A trial that at most should take a couple of months, seems inexorably destined for needless protraction.
While a plethora of Congress spokesmen belligerently proclaim their commitment to Zero Toleration for terrorism on the several platforms afforded to them to air their views, the empirical evidence discloses that Congress deeds do not match their words. The truth is that Congress electoral compulsions have rendered the Congress inefficacious in the fight against terrorism. In fact, Congress has no stomach to fight the new 21st Century manifestation of terrorism that threatens the Indian subcontinent : Jehadi Terrorism .
