Amrik Singh

The justice for the assassination of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was believed to have been dispensed by hanging Satwant Singh and Kehar Singh in a hasty manner, while the appeal to spare Kehar Singh’s life was, however, defeated in the Supreme Court and the office of the President of India even though his involvement wasn’t supported by any concrete evidence. But the execution was carried out of compulsion to send a weird message that the death of people in power is different from those on the streets.

The organized orgy of violence against Sikhs in Delhi, Kanpur, Bhilai, Jamshedpur and other places continued for three days. The Indian legislative body, executive, and the judiciary appeared to have decided that the carnage was a natural consequence, a spontaneous reaction, of Indians at the death of their leader and a tribute to her. In contrast, after the 9/11 attack a man named Frank Silva Roque declaring his extreme love for America by fatally shooting Balbir Singh Sodhi in Arizona. The average American may have sympathies for his disturbed state of mind for the victims of 9/11 but it did not stop the U.S. judiciary from awarding Roque with a death sentence just two years after the killing.

In Delhi and elsewhere there were more than 5,000 Sikhs who were massacred in a horrific way, and it hasn’t evoked any reaction from the Indian government, including the judiciary and the executive branches of the largest democracy on the planet. Compare it with the response of the US Department of Justice that wrote a letter to the Sodhi family expressing its regret at the death of Balbir Singh Sodhi. United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan also responded by sending a message of grief to the Sodhi family. Witness the apathy of the Indian Government apathy in failing to admit the barbarity of the crime that killed on several thousand people of a particular community. On top of this, there is a continued attempt to wash their hands of these crimes by instituting a series of commissions and committees over the years.

Although Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh tendered an apology for the gory incidents of Sikh lynchings in Delhi, it has not assuaged the community's wounds. The manner in which Dr. Singh reacted to public protests following the Nanavati Commission Report shows a politician trying hard to avert rising protests and support for victims around the world. Had the apology demonstrated a genuine feeling of the Congress party, Manmohan Singh government would not have made a statement of taking no action against the guilty at the first instance. The decision to pay no attention to the recommendations of the Nanavati Commission by the government was probably in the background of the fate of other eight reports previously submitted to the various government since1984. Once again Sikhs are shocked to see the Indian Government clearly declare that no action would be taken against the members of the ruling Congress party allegedly involved in the killings of 3200 Sikhs in the capital city of Delhi. The killers of Sikhs in other states enjoy power both among people and in the government. How does one explain such a cover-up in a democratic society?

The Nanavati Commission report on 1984 Sikh massacre, tabled in the Indian parliament for discussion created a furor in the country largely because the Government immediately made its intention clear about taking no action against the guilty. The nine commissions and committees appointed after the dreadful killing of Sikhs under the watchful eyes of Delhi Police did not bring any sense of justice. Now after twenty years, Justice Nanavati submitted a report that may be considered partially unfavorable to the interests of the Congress Party. But circumstances have changed since 1984, as no party is enjoying an absolute majority in the parliament. Earlier, it was a one party rule, like a dictator, since they controlled both Houses of the parliament. Credit goes to CPI (M), a major partner of the coalition, for having refused to join the executive in trying to ensure that justice is served. Had CPI(M) not insisted on tabling the Nanavati Commission report in the parliament, there was every chance that the Congress leadership would have relegated the report to oblivion. The main opposition party, NDA has nothing to do with justice; they are merely protesting for political reasons. There is no evidence to suggest a fundamental change in NDA’s perspective on Punjab.

“I felt like a refugee in my country. In fact, I felt like a Jew in Nazi Germany,” said the pro-congress Sikh columnist Khushwant Singh after the massacre of Sikhs in Delhi. A Sikh soldier in his military uniform after vacationing with his family set out to report for duty, and on his way he was attacked in spite of his entreaties that he was a military man committed to defend the very people who were attacking him. The mob killed him there and then, and threw his body in the sewage. Similarly, Sikh soldiers were pulled out of trains and killed by unruly mobs.

Justice Nanavati has pointed to the possibility of Jagdish Tytler organizing the crimes witnessed in some parts of Delhi. The strong evidence against him is that he removed all Sikh police officers to other places and deployed the ones who were told to ensure maximum Sikh casualties. He provided voting lists of the area with Sikh names highlighted. He didn’t sleep on the night of 31st October, 1984 and was closeted with his supporters arrange everything for the hoodlums to carry out the attacks. The strategy was that the poor in slums would be most motivated when asked to loot Sikh homes as wantonly as they willed. They were also told that the Government was on their side and people were explained about their mission, material and machinery was provided, extralegal support was given, routes were charted out, and voting lists were given to mob designated leaders.

“When a big tree falls, the earth trembles” was the reaction of Rajiv Gandhi to the killing of innocent people. The Congress cadre was happy as they had made the stage ready to show the world how popular was their dead leader. Like his grandfather Jawahar Lal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India who had taken reigns of the country when thousands of Muslims on the one side and Hindus and Sikhs on other were killed in the worst case of ethnic cleansing, Rajiv Gandhi assumed control by authorizing his supporters to show their love for his mother-land.

Indira Gandhi was idolized by her supporters as Durga, an angry Hindu goddess, the scourge to evil-doers. The frustration of the Congress was greater than ever when Indira fell like any other mortal. But in order to show her extraordinary status, it needed to exhibit its muscle behind the mindless act of mob violence. Was it a tribute to the memory of Indira Gandhi or an insult to her image? She adopted Machiavellian principles to run the country and overstepped the limits of propriety to prop herself in power. In fact after being defeated in 1977, Indira had made up her mind to cash on anything that created divisions and hatred among the Indian people.

Having tasted defeat at the hands of Jaya Parkash Narayan in 1977, the Congress was treading a very dangerous path. The atrocities and human rights violations during national Emergency had upset Indira’s operation to become an indispensable leader. What Bangladesh war had done to hoist her image, the emergency had undone it. Under these unfavorable circumstances, Indira looked for a way to lead the crowd into Hindu revivalism as a way to distract from issues of poverty, unemployment, disease and death. The stealing of RSS’s agenda coupled with leftist’s harangue against Punjab became handy instruments. All political parties felt that Indira was serving their ends in her fight against separatism. For this she needed to show the people that the nation was under siege. The Punjab became a bastion of her designs.

Indira had a willing coterie of loyal servants and sycophants to help carry out her Machiavellian intentions. Her mind had been continuously working on those lines when she picked Giani Zail Singh as the President of India. The Sikh leadership could never measure up to the complexity of the game. Even Akali Dal declared support for the nomination of Giani Zail Singh. It was the single most blunder the Akalis committed. It showed that the Akali party never had a wind of what was coming next. Or they too might have played in Indira’s hands as most other parties willingly or unwillingly did, and were obsessed to support her campaign against religious fundamentalism.

The implication of Nanavati Commission Report for Sikhs is that it has advertised their grievance at the international level. Due to the insistence of the CPI(M) and other opposition parties the Congress leadership was forced to table the Nanavati report in the parliament. The dependency of Manmohan Singh’s government on the Leftist front brought all the pressure on Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar to resign after widespread protests. This had never have happened during the last 20 years that demonstrated the lack of concern and insensitivity for the battered Sikh community.

The military attack on Golden Temple on the day of the martyrdom of Guru Arjan Dev on June 1984 that trapped thousands of innocent devotees in the crossfire was to show to the world that there was a real threat to the sovereignty of India. The pogrom of November 1984 is now observed as fourth Sikh holocaust, the Blue Star operation being the third. Recently, in Chicago, a conference was organized by Institute for Conflict and Peace Studies (IFCAPS) to focus on June and November, 1984 mass killing of Sikhs by the majority community with the connivance of the Government of the time. It is true that Nanavati Commission Report is quite deficient in accounting for the barbarous acts of those responsible for organizing the crime. Promises to Sikhs in the long saga of valor were always to dupe them.

Words to Guru Gobind Singh in Anandpur Sahib well phrased in the Zafarnama, the British’s treaty in 1846, Jawahar Lal Nehru’s commitment to Sikhs during India’s independence, the Indira Award of 1976, Rajiv-Longowal Agreement of 1985, and promise to Sikhs on Udham Singh Nagar are a few illustrations of betrayal and brutalities. The future of Sikhs will meet the same fate so long as Sikh leadership remains psychologically ambivalent, ideologically blind, and politically intransigent.


Copyright©2005 Amrik Singh. About the author