Refugee Review Tribunal

AUSTRALIA

RRT RESEARCH RESPONSE

Research Response Number: IND31910 Country: Date: 14 June 2007

Keywords: India – – Bajrang Dal –

This response was prepared by the Country Research Section of the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the RRT within time constraints. This response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum.

Questions

1. Please provide information about -Muslim riots in Gujarat. Are these problems on- going in 2007? 2. Please provide information about the and Bajrang Dal groups in Gujarat. Are these groups present in other states? What states do not have Hindu extremists? Are Muslims more protected in some states in India? 3. Please provide information about the Godhra train incident (2002). 4. How would a Muslim butcher prepare meat (and particularly chicken) in such a way to satisfy Islamic religious requirements?

RESPONSE

1. Please provide information about the Hindu-Muslim riots in Gujarat. Are these problems on-going in 2007? 3. Please provide information about the Godhra train incident (2002).

The Indian state of Gujarat has a history of communal violence between and Muslims. According to a report by , between 1970 and 2002, Gujarat experienced four hundred and forty three Hindu – Muslim riots. The report highlighted that:

The riot in in 1969, which left 630 dead, remained the most serious riot. In 1990, L.K. Advani’s (leader of the Bhartiya Janata Party) Rath Yatra (religious procession) sparked riots that left about 220 dead in the state. In 1992, the demolition of the [in ] also set off a wave of violence that killed 325 people, mostly Muslims (Jaffrelot, J. 2003, ‘Communal Riots in Gujarat: The State at Risk?’, Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative , Working paper No. 17, July http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/volltexte/2003/4127/pdf/hpsacp17.pdf – Accessed 8 November 2006 – Attachment 1; also see RRT Country Research 2006, Research Response IND31126, 19 December – Attachment 2; RRT Country Research 2006, Research Response IND30931, 16 November – Attachment 3). On 27 February 2002, the Sabramati Express carrying volunteers of the – a Hindu nationalist community comprising of the militant Rashtriya Swansewak Sangh (RSS), militant Hindu youths Bajrang Dal (BD), World Hindu Council Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Hindu Student’s Association Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) and the Hindu enlightenment movement Hindu Jagaran Manch (HJM) – from Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh were allegedly attacked by Muslims at the Godhra train station, where fifty seven Hindus were burnt to death (‘Scores killed in India train attack’ 2002, BBC News website, 27 February http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1843591.stm – Accessed 8 November 2006 – Attachment 4).

Immediately, the Sangh Parivar called on the Hindus in Gujarat to avenge the attack at Godhra. Mira Kamdar writing in the World Policy Journal describes in detail the communal violence unleashed by Hindus militants in Gujarat.

Truckloads of Hindus, mostly young men— many sporting headbands in saffron, the Hindu sacred colour — headed for Muslim neighbourhoods. They were armed not only with homemade gasoline bombs, trishurs (the trident-shaped weapon associated with the god Shiva), and knives but also, in some cases, with printouts from government computer databases listing the names and addresses of Muslims and Muslim-owned businesses.

For about 24 hours, there was calm. And then, almost simultaneously, in different localities, in both urban and rural areas across Gujarat, a systematic wave of terror against the Muslim population began. Truckloads of Hindus, mostly young men— many sporting headbands in saffron, the Hindu sacred colour—headed for Muslim neighbourhoods. They were armed not only with homemade gasoline bombs, trishurs (the trident-shaped weapon associated with the god Shiva), and knives but also, in some cases, with printouts from government computer databases listing the names and addresses of Muslims and Muslim-owned businesses. Some of the young Hindus even had cell phones—the better to keep in touch with their handlers—and bottles of water. They embarked on a rampage of looting, arson, rape, torture, and murder that left thousands dead and many more thousands homeless.

Muslim homes and businesses were looted, and then the buildings and often the dismembered bodies of the former occupants were set on fire. Neighbouring Hindu homes and businesses were spared. In many localities, the police, when they didn’t simply turn a blind eye to the attacks, were seen helping the attackers identify their targets. With few exceptions, no protection was offered to those terrified Muslims who, in desperation, begged the police for help. According to , the general response of the police was: “We have no orders to save you.” The savagery of the attacks— which routinely included dismemberment, gang rape, beheadings, dousing bodies with petrol and burning them so as to render them unrecognizable, liquidating entire families, including women, children, babies, and fetuses ripped from the womb— was all the more shocking for their well-organized and premeditated execution. It was evident that state and local authorities not only did nothing to stop the violence but were actually complicit in orchestrating the attacks (Kamdar, M 2002, ‘The Struggle for India’s Soul’, World Policy Journal website, vol. XIX, no. 3 http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/articles/wpj02-3/kamdar.html – Accessed 8 November 2006 – Attachment 5).

The Telegraph of 4 March 2002 provided testimonies from Muslims who stated that “the police simply stood by, or in some cases even encouraged the rioters as they went on the rampage, burning entire families to death in their own homes”. The report highlighted the following eye witness accounts of the violence:

“The police actively supported the rioters, almost as if they were accompanying them,” Sakina Inayat Sajid, who lost six of her family and whose husband is missing, said from her hospital bed.

The few policemen she pleaded with for help in Shehajpuri Patia told her to “go and die elsewhere”. But there was no escape. All exit points had been surrounded by mobs armed with swords, iron rods, acid and paraffin.

“I do not know how I made it out alive,” said Mehboob Sheikh, a lorry driver, who lost all nine family members, including his two children. The killings ended when the first troops arrived.

“But by then it was too late,” said Shabana Abdul Sayeed at the local civil hospital. “There was nothing left to destroy or burn” (Bedi, R. 2002, ‘Soldiers ‘held back to allow Hindus revenge’, Telegraph, 4 March http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/03/04/whind04.xml – Accessed 7 June 2007 – Attachment 6; also see: Harding, L. 2002, ‘Police took part in slaughter’, Guardian Unlimited, 3 March http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4366650,00.html – Accessed 7 June 2007 – Attachment 7).

As a result of the violence in Gujarat in 2002, more than two hundred thousand people were displaced from their homes and around two thousand, mainly Muslims, were murdered by Hindu militants in central and eastern Gujarat. According to a report on the Islam Online website, the Muslim victims of the communal violence are still waiting for justice and “it is the lack of justice, secular campaigners believe, that now fuels the growth of systematic communal violence and tension in the subcontinent”. The report notes that:

The Human rights workers have warned that because no effective political counterbalance exists to rival the influence of the BJP and other Hindu nationalist organizations, the majority of those responsible for the 2002 riots and those guilty of other acts of communal violence in India will never have to answer for their crimes. It is this lack of justice, secular campaigners believe, that now fuels the growth of systematic communal violence and tension in the subcontinent, since extreme right-wing Hindu groups are largely free to operate with impunity (Sisodia, R. 2007, ‘India’s Gujarat: Five Years in Agony’, Islam Online, 16 May http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1178724225641&pagename= Zone-English-Muslim_Affairs%2FMAELayout – Accessed 7 June 2007 – Attachment 8).

According to Asghar Ali Engineer, communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims continued in Gujarat between 2002 and 2005. However, he notes that the communal violence in 2004 and 2005 were “also comparatively less violent” compared to what transpired in the state in 2002. Nevertheless, Asghar Ali notes that petty issues often get out of control because “Gujarat is a highly communalised state today in India, thanks to the BJP rule and ’s [the Chief Minister of Gujarat] open hostility towards Muslims”. According to Ali:

Gujarat is highly communalised state today in India, thanks to BJP rule and Narendra Modi’s open hostility towards Muslims. Trouble began when people in a marriage procession, accompanied by DJ and high power music system, allegedly beat up an auto-rickshaw driver passing on the same rout when he complained of traffic jam. The driver belonged to the minority community, ran away after being beaten up. Soon thereafter a mob came and pelted in stones. A posse of policemen rushed and lobbed four tear gas shells. About a dozen people including a policeman were injured. Four persons were arrested and police also seized the music system. The rioting in Vadodra was followed by one in Jaunpur village Khetasarai on 4th February. Here it was result of dispute about a cemetery land. In this one woman was killed and 23 persons were injured. Communal tension mounted in the area subsequent to this incident. Violence erupted when some people hoisted saffron flag on the cemetery land when settlement process was on. Then people of one community set fire to two houses of another community. And in response to that people of another community set fire to one shop. Then PAC reinforcements were brought. The people of two communities gathered in large numbers and raised slogans against each other. The police arrested 23 persons from both the communities (Engineer, A. A. 2006, ‘Communal Riots 2005’, Indian Muslims, 20 January http://www.indianmuslims.info/reports_about_indian_muslims/communal_riots_2005_asghar _ali_engineer.html – Accessed 7 June 2007 – Attachment 9).

In May 2006, communal violence flared up in Gujarat municipality of Yakutpura in city after the government demolished a Muslim shrine (Dargah). According to the People’s Union of Civil Liberties, Muslims gathered around the shrine to protect it from the demolition squad but the police moved in to break the crowd as both Hindu and Muslim communities accused each other of provocation. The People’s Union for Civil Liberties noted that “violence rapidly spread to other parts of the city namely Panigate and Sant Kabir Road. The police also opened fire in Nawapura, Hathikhana and Kumbharwada in the Fatehapura area.”. The report stated that:

The people of Yakutpura told us that on 1st May they had gathered around the Dargah to protect it from the demolition squad. The people milled around the Dargah and they also said that Nalin Bhatt, ex-BJP Minister, and others had gathered near the Dargah well before the operation began. According to the people in Yakutpura they had gathered around the Dargah peacefully. They said stone throwing began from Mehta Pol – a Hindu area near the Darwaza. Hindus on the contrary allege that the stone throwing began from the Muslim-dominated Yakutpura. As a result, people ran helterskelter and the police opened fire. Chaos reigned for more than two hours. The warning fire was hardly noticed by the people. The Police did not have a hand mike to give warnings, and seem to have ignored the gravity of the situation. The Police shot straight at the people, aiming at head and chest levels. Two boys died on the spot. Some women who stay in houses right next to the spot where the firing took place told us that we were all huddled on the first floor and saw everything. They are also very agitated. Some women told us that “if they want us to die they should kill us straightaway,” “what if these bullets had hit some young kids in houses, who is accountable for this?” The police fired 36 rounds according to the people. They have also collected used and unused tear gas shells. We saw bullet marks on the laris and the walls and it is very clear that it was indiscriminate firing although the Police Commissioner later claimed that the bullets probably ricocheted.

Violence in Other Parts of the City

Violence rapidly spread to other parts of the city namely Panigate and Sant Kabir Road. The police also opened fire in Nawapura, Hathikhana and Kumbharwada in the Fatehapura area. At around 2 pm on 1st May, six dumpers carrying the debris of the destroyed Dargah were passing through the Dudhwala Mohalla behind Nyay Mandir (the Court complex). After three dumpers passed through, stone throwing started from the mohalla. A couple of persons inside the dumpers were injured. According to advocate Israt Sheikh, as the stone throwing intensified some people inside Nyay Mandir presumed that the attack was on the Court and shut the doors. Despite the fact that nobody was injured, a security guard of the Sessions Judge fired in the air. There was retaliation from the Court complex -this was confirmed by other advocates. Advocate Neeraj Jain (a VHP activist) alleged that about 50 persons had entered the Court premises with weapons. 10 people were later arrested in connection to this. Another advocate Malti Vani said that youth from the minority areas came with kerosene and set 6 vehicles on fire and also resorted to stone throwing. Some advocates went to the Police Commissioner to present a memorandum who advised them to file a complaint. However the advocates were unwilling to file a complaint (‘Vadodara: Violence on Gujarat’s Gaurav Day’ 2006, People’s Union for Civil Liberties website, 1 – 13 May http://www.onlinevolunteers.org/gujarat/reports/pucl/interim_may2k6.pdf – Accessed 7 June 2006 – Attachment 10).

Communal violence spread from Vadodara to Ahmedabad in Gujarat in 2006. According to the Daily Star, “at least 30 people were hurt in clashes between Hindus and Muslims in Ahmedabad in Indian Gujarat”. The report highlighted that “hundreds of people were involved in the fighting, and that most of the injuries were caused by stones or burning missiles. The violence in Ahmedabad follows Hindu-Muslim riots in Vadodara city, also in Gujarat, earlier this month that killed six people and left scores wounded” (‘Hindu-Muslim clash in Indian Gujarat’ 2006, Daily Times, 29 May http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C05%5C29%5Cstory_29-5- 2006_pg7_5 – Accessed 6 June 2007 – Attachment 11).

As during the 2002 violence, the Gujarat police was once again accused by Muslims of needlessly targeting members of their community. The Economic Times reported that “people belonging to the minority community have alleged police ‘inaction’ in protecting their lives and property and they were, in fact, the target of police action in the violence in the last three days, following the demolition of a 200 year-old dargah on Monday”. The report continued that:

A 58-year-old hand-cart puller, Mehmmudmiya Sheikh, who is recuperating at the SSG Hospital here, said when he was passing through Bhoyvada area of the city on May 1 at around 12 noon, the police stopped him and asked his name.

“They fired at my legs when I told them my name,” he alleged. Apart from allegations of the police targeting them, the minority community members allege that the police did not respond to their calls for help.

Siraj, brother of Rafiq Vohra, who died on April 2, said his brother was torched to death as the police did not respond to their several calls. A mob of 5,000 people gheraoed him and set his car on fire as nobody came to help them, he added.

A neighbour of Siraj Vohra, Asma Sheikh rues that in the Vadodara violence, they have been at the receiving end of stone pelting, police lobbing tear gas shells and firing. “What can we do to deal with such a situation?” she inquired.

Mustafa Khan, a relative of an injured at the SSG hospital, alleged what was happening in Vadodara was a repeat of the ‘02 violence.

The police, however, maintain that those who have received bullet injuries were part of the mob who indulged in rioting. City police commissioner Deepak Swarap said the police opened fire to bring the situation under control (‘Gujarat police accused of inaction, again’ 2006, The Economic Times, 7 June http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1516911.cms – Accessed 7 June 2007 – Attachment 12).

Gujarat Recent Developments – 2007

Fake Encounters Tensions between the Hindus and Muslims increased after it was disclosed in April 2007 that the Gujarat government was involved in the killing of a Muslim in a fake encounter in November 2005 and his wife, Kauser Bi, a few days later. According to the India Daily, the Gujarat assembly was adjourned for the day soon after lunch break after the Congress and its supporting parties insisted on discussions on the Gujarat killings. On 9 May 2007, a former police officer, R.B. Sreekumar, told the Indo-Asian News Service (IANS) that “he had received ‘clear instructions’ while in service to target the Muslim community in staged shootouts”. The report noted that “Gujarat has been the scene of many ‘encounter deaths’ – a police euphemism for killings in shootouts, real or faked – since 2002 when the state witnessed one of the most horrifying communal clashes which caused the death of many people mostly Muslims”. According to the Kavkazcenter website:

The police are under political pressure to lead planed shootouts, said Sreekumar in a phone call to IANS from his home in Ahmedabad. Modi was angered by Sreekumar when he gave statements against him during the trial of the accused in the 2002 communal violence. His statements came after the arrest of two senior Gujarat Police officers and one from for the cold blooded murder of Sohrabuddin Sheikh, a Muslim man in November 2005, after claiming that he was a planning to assassinate Modi (‘Parliament rocked by Gujarat fake encounter killings’ 2007, India Daily, 7 May http://www.indiadaily.com/breaking_news/89339.asp – Accessed 7 June 2007 – Attachment 13; ‘Gujarat Muslim Killings were authorized’ 2007, Kavkazcenter website, 9 May source: Indo-Asian News Service (9 May 2007) http://kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2007/05/09/8245.shtml – Accessed 6 June 2007 – Attachment 12; ‘Gujarat govt confirms Kausar Bi’s death, investigating officer removed’ 2007, Hindustan Times, 30 April – Attachment 14).

Muslim Complaints

In February 2007, Muslims displaced by the riots of 2002 staged a protest in Ahmedabad, demanding a special economic relief package from the central government. Muslims complained that the BJP government in Gujarat had failed to provide basic amenities in the rehabilitation camps and as a result, the community has formed an organisation called Antarik Visthapit Hak Rakshak to lobby for basic human rights for Muslims. According to The Hindu:

Some 3,000 Muslims, gathered at the Gujarat Vidyapith here on Thursday, claimed to represent some 5,000 families with about 23,000 people displaced from their homes during the riots and were still living away from their homes.

They represented their cases before a panel, complaining about lack of facilities from the BJP Government in the State and formed an organisation, “Antarik Visthapit Hak Rakshak Samiti,” to carry forward their struggle for justice.

Among those present in the panel were Sayeda Hamid, a member of the Planning Commission, Dilip Padgaonkar, journalist and member of the National Minority Commission, P.J. Namboothiri, a retired IPS officer of the Gujarat cadre, and R. A. Mehta, retired judge of the Gujarat High Court.

A three-point charter of demands presented by the displaced Muslims said they demanded “recognition as citizens of India with basic rights to life with dignity and livelihood.”

They demanded basic amenities in the rehabilitation camps (‘Gujarat Muslims seek special package’ 2007, The Hindu, 2 February http://www.hindu.com/2007/02/02/stories/2007020219161400.htm – Accessed 6 June 2007 – Attachment 15).

Zahir Janmohamed, the associate editor of alt.Muslim website told Counter Currents in March 2007 that “eighty-seven Muslim men have been held since 2002 for ‘starting the train fire’ and ‘igniting the violence’, despite India’s Supreme Court own acknowledgment which found the Hindu nationalist BJP group complicit in the violence”. Zahir Janmohamed further elaborated that:

I have been called many things in the past five years, most of which are not suitable to publish on this site. But perhaps one of the most unfair criticisms levelled at me and other activists working against communalism in India is that somehow our assessment of what transpired in Gujarat is maudlin or excessively sentimental. This indeed may be the case, but it is not without reason. I will always remember 12 year-old Sadik, who I met in a relief camp just shortly after the violence ensued. He fled for relief after he witnessed his father burned alive and his mother raped and then immolated. He never did speak to me – or to anyone – during the six months that I saw him in the camp. But at night, after the aid workers would leave, I often found Sadik sitting alone in the corner, crying quietly.

I am not sure what has happened to him since but I suspect there are nights when he still cries and wonders why, five years later, his tears are still needed (Janmohamed, Z. 2007, ‘Truth Trickles Out: The Gujarat Pogrom Five Years Later’, Counter Currents, 2 March http://www.countercurrents.org/guj-janmohamad020307.htm – Accessed 7 June 2007 – Attachment 16).

The India Together website in February 2007 reported that the Gujarat government provided very little support for the education of Muslim children. “What’s more the education department appears to be standing in the way of the embattled community’s attempts to help itself”. According to the report “Muslim children have little by way of support for education in an area conveniently labelled a Muslim-ghetto and forgotten”. New journalist Deepa explains:

It’s difficult to imagine that the bare red bricks and the jutting iron rods of a school building that’s under construction can symbolise the hopes, aspirations and struggles of an entire community. But the walls of this work-in-progress in Ahmedabad mirror the story of Gujarat’s Muslims, who, after the riots of 2002, have been confined to areas that have no educational, medical or indeed any civic facility. The school, which its builders plan to paint in blue, white and yellow, is meant to alter a partisan, possibly state government-approved script of ensuring that Muslim children have little by way of support for education in an area conveniently labelled a Muslim-ghetto and forgotten.

“Our family trust purchased this building,” says Sharifkhan N Pathan of Nawab Builders, who is now remodelling the old structure to create more space for the school. “We had to start it compulsorily,” he offers by way of explanation. “Teachers harass our children when they go to the schools located outside Muslim pockets. So we decided it was best to build our own schools.”

Ahmedabad’s topography, today defined almost entirely by religion, seems to be motivating the likes of Pathan to set up schools in areas that are Muslim pockets. After the riots, in which, according to Gujarat Government figures, over a 1,000 people — a majority of them Muslims — were killed, the city has been clearly demarcated into Hindu and Muslim areas, with the ‘borders’ in between representing the extent of the divide. If the Hindu areas have Dominoes and Café Coffee Days, the Muslim pockets have dusty, un-tarred roads lined by sooty tyre shops. Each school that is set up in a Muslim-dominated locality, therefore, is an attempt to circumvent a future that has already been determined according to stereotypes.

Afsal M Memon, a businessman and social worker who started a school in Danilimda in 2004, says the Muslim community does feel the need to ensure that the children receive a modern education. “But Muslims won’t send their children to other areas — the non-Muslims behave badly with them,” he adds. Just over two years after Memon started the school, it runs in two shifts, and has over 1,000 students, says Nazneen U G, the high school section principal. Those numbers are indicators of many things: a community’s desperation for a school with a roof and teachers, the Gujarat Government’s refusal to help, and the shoddy way in which the few — if any — municipal schools are run in areas where Muslims have sought safety in numbers (Deepa, A. 2007, ‘Segregated and building their own schools’, India Together website, 5 February http://www.indiatogether.org/2007/feb/edu- embattled.htm – Accessed 6 June 2007 – Attachment 17).

2. Please provide information about the Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal groups in Gujarat. Are these groups present in other states? What states do not have Hindu extremists? Are Muslims more protected in some states in India?

The Shiv Sena and the Bajrang Dal (BD) are part of the Sangh Parivar in the Indian state of Gujarat, which is governed by the Hindu nationalist Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP). Question 1 of Research Response IND30469 of 11 August 2006 noted that the Shiv Sena fields candidates but does not hold any seats in the Gujarat Assembly. However, the organisation has a significant presence in the neighbouring state of Maharashtra. According to Question 1 of Research Response IND30864 of 7 November 2006, the Shiv Sena and its coalition partner, the BJP, hold power in the Municipal Corporation of Mumbai, which is the capital of Maharashtra (RRT Country Research Response 2006, Research Response IND30469, 11 August – Attachment 18; RRT Country Research Response 2006, Research Response IND30864, 7 November – Attachment 19).

In July 2006, Shiv Sena activists in Gujarat held protest rallies in the Gujarat cities of Ahmedabad and Surat after the statue of Meenatai Thackeray, the wife of Sena leader, , was desecrated in Mumbai. According to The Hindu:

The incident had its impact in Gujarat. Shiv Sainiks took out protest rallies in Ahmedabad and Surat, demanding action against those who desecrated the statue. In Surat, the Shiv Sainiks also attempted to enforce a “bandh’’ but it was foiled by the police (‘Don’t politicise issue: Deshmukh’ 2006, The Hindu, 10 July http://www.hindu.com/2006/07/10/stories/2006071015341400.htm – Accessed 8 June 2007 – Attachment 20).

In March 2005, the Shiv Sena burnt an effigy of George Bush after the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, was refused visa to the United States after protests from civil rights groups of Modi’s alleged role in the communal riots of February and March 2002. According to The Hindu, “activists of the and the Shiv Sena took to the streets here [] today [19 March] holding demonstrations in protest against the U.S. decision to deny a visa to the Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi” (‘BJP, Shiv Sena protest against visa denial to Modi’ 2005, The Hindu, 20 March http://www.hindu.com/2005/03/20/stories/2005032010050300.htm – Accessed 8 June 2007 – Attachment 21). The Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal in 2002 reported that a number of Shiv Sena and BD leaders were identified by the victims of Gujarat riots as participating in violent attacks against the Muslim community. According to the report:

Virtually every judicial commission of inquiry officially appointed to investigate communal riots since Independence and Partition, has indicted organisations affiliated with or allied to the RSS/VHP/BD/BJP combine, including the Maharashtra-based Shiv Sena, for their role in violent crimes against India’ minorities (‘Crime Against Humanity: Volume Two’, 2002, Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal, Sabrang website, 21 November http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/tribunal2.pdf – Accessed 26 April 2007 – Attachment 22).

National Strike

The Bandh call [national strike] given by VHP and backed by ruling BJP on 28th Feb.02 become a bloody battle ground for Bajrang Dal, VHP and RSS & Shiv Sena Terrorists to kill, burn alive, murders, loot & burn their shops, office and house with police outing as the supporters on these fanatics. Hate Speeches

March 15, 2002 Deep Channel showed rally after shiladaan; 3 local leaders – Deepak Kharchikar (Shiv Sena), Niraj Jain (Bajrang Dal) and Ajay Dave (VHP) gave speeches and interviews at the Machchipeeth naka. These contained anti- Muslim sentiments. “Muslims will have to live the way we want, otherwise we will pull them out of their houses and kill them”.

Police Action

When Hindu mob attacked Muslim areas: Macchipith Police opened fire and burst teargas shells at Muslim. At the time of this incident police were seen taking firing orders from Raopura, BJP, MLA Yoges Patel, BJP city president Sharan Brambhat, Balu Shukla, Umakant Joshi, ex mayor from Baroda, Dipak Kharchikar, Hindu Shiv Sena leaders Niraj Jain VHP president Baroda…

Cases of many Hindus belonging to the Shiv Sena, Rashtriya Utsav Mandal (an extension of the local branch of the Jana Sangh) were wrongly classified as ‘A’ category and investigations closed and no proper investigation was undertaken into several complaints of murders of Muslims and arson of their property…

Deputy Superintendent of Police S.P.Saraf held private conferences and discussions with several leaders of Hindu organisations including many who were implicated by Muslims in offences of arson and murder. Some of the leaders with whom Saraf held private conferences and discussions were Dr. B.P.Vyas who was president of the Bhiwandi branch of the Jana Sangh and the guiding spirit of the RUM, Baliram Mahadeo More, shakhapramukh of the Bhiwandi branch of the Shiv Sena, Mohanlal Parshram Karwa who was one of the founders of the Nagrik Hiarakshak Mandal, a body set up to present the case of Hindu parties before the Commission and many others (‘Crime Against Humanity: Volume Three’ 2002, Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal, Sabrang website, 21 November http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/tribunal3.pdf – Accessed 26 April 2007 – Attachment 23; further information on Bajrang Dal is provided by RRT Country Research 2005, Research Response IND17525, 26 September – Attachment 24).

According to the RSS website, the organisation has branches or Shakhas in all Indian states (http://www.rss.org/New_RSS/Organisation/ShakhaInfo.jsp). Research Response IND31849 of 6 June 2007 provided information on recent activities of Hindu militants in the Indian states of Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Orissa and Kerala. Relevant extracts from the response appears below under relevant sub-headings: Muslim population, freedom of movement and internal relocation.

Muslim Population

The US Department of State International Religious Freedom Report of 2006 provided information on the demography of the Muslim population in India. According to the report, “large Muslim populations are found in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Kerala, and Muslims were the majority in Jammu and Kashmir”. The report stated that:

According to the 2001 Government census, Hindus constituted 80.5 percent of the population, Muslims 13.4 percent, Christians 2.3 percent, Sikhs 1.8 percent, and others, including Buddhists, Jains, Parsis (Zoroastrians), Jews, and Baha’is, 1.1 percent. Slightly more than 90 percent of Muslims were Sunni; the rest were Shi’a. Buddhists included followers of the Mahayana and Hinayana schools, and there were both Roman Catholic and Protestant Christians. Tribal groups (members of indigenous groups historically outside the caste system), which in government statistics generally were included among Hindus, often practiced traditional indigenous religions (animism). Hindus and Muslims were spread throughout the country, although large Muslim populations were found in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Kerala, and Muslims were the majority in Jammu and Kashmir (RRT Country Research 2007, Research Response IND31849, 6 June – Attachment 25; US Department of State 2006, International Religious Freedom Report for 2006 – India, 19 September – Attachment 26).

Freedom of Movement

According to the US Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006, “the law provides for freedom of movement, and the government generally respected this in practice; however, in certain border areas the government required special permits”. The report highlights that:

Security forces often searched and questioned occupants at vehicle checkpoints, mostly in troubled areas in the Kashmir Valley or after major terrorist attacks. The government also completed construction (except in areas of difficult terrain) of a 330- mile security fence along the LOC in Jammu and Kashmir, causing occasional difficulties for local residents, as it cut through some villages and agricultural lands. The government erected the security fence to stop arms smuggling and infiltration by Pakistani-based terrorists or insurgents. The government attributed a decline in insurgent crossings during the year in part to the fence.

Under the Passports Act of 1967, the government may deny a passport to any applicant who “may or is likely to engage outside India in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India.” In the past, the government used this provision to prohibit foreign travel by some government critics, especially those advocating Sikh independence and members of the separatist movement in Jammu and Kashmir.

Unlike in previous years, there were no reports of the government using the issuance of passports or travel documents to restrict travel of separatist leaders in Jammu and Kashmir. However, citizens from Jammu and Kashmir faced extended delays, often up to two years, before the Ministry of External Affairs would issue or renew their passports. Government officials also regularly demanded bribes before issuing passports from Jammu and Kashmir that required special clearances. Applicants born in Jammu and Kashmir--even the children of serving military officers born during their parents’ deployment in the state--were subjected to additional scrutiny, requests for bribes, and police clearances prior to passport issuance.

There was no law banning forced exile; however, there were no reports of forced exile during the year (US Department of State 2007, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006 – India, 6 March – Attachment 27).

Internal Relocation

The UK Home Office Report of 2007 stated that “the law provides for secular government and the protection of religious freedom. However, during 2005, whilst the central Government generally respected these provisions in practice; it sometimes did not act effectively to counter societal attacks against religious minorities and attempts by state and local governments to limit religious freedom”. The report highlighted that Indian law provided for freedom of movement and the government generally respected this in practice.

The law provides for freedom of movement and the Government generally respects this in practice, however, in certain border areas the Government requires special permits. Therefore, as a general rule, an internal relocation option exists from one Indian State to another. However, the situation as regards internal relocation for single women, divorcees with or without children, and widows may differ from the situation for men as it may be difficult for women on their own to find secure accommodation. Although rents are high and landlords are often unwilling to rent to single women, there are hostels particularly in urban areas where a large number of call centres provide employment. The situation for women with children is likely to be more difficult as children may not be accepted in hostels. Illiterate women from rural areas are likely to find it particularly difficult to obtain accommodation as a lone woman. For some women in India relocation will not be unduly harsh but this is only likely to be the case where the individual is single, without children to support and is educated enough to be able to support herself. Some single women may also be able to relocate to live with extended family or friends in other parts of the country. However, where these circumstances do not apply internal relocation is likely to be unduly harsh (UK Home Office 2007, Operational Guidance Note: India, 20 February, Section 3.8 – Attachment 28).

The Human Rights Watch report 2007 reported that “in a number of cities in Gujarat, communal hate has led to internal displacement along religious lines, while Muslim businesses have been boycotted by Hindus.” The report noted that:

5,703 riot-affected Muslim families were yet to be properly compensated and rehabilitated, with chairman Hamid Ansari describing this as an “abdication of Constitutional responsibility on the part of the state government with reference to victims of the 2002 riots who are living in barely human conditions” (Human Rights Watch 2007, World Report – India, January – Attachment 29).

A DFAT report of 13 October 2003 on freedom of movement within India states that:

Indian citizens have the freedom to relocate from one area of India to another, with two exceptions: in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, Indian citizens from other states are not allowed to buy property, but can stay in any part of the state without seeking official permission. Indian citizens who are not residents of the particular area are required to obtain a permit to visit some border areas of Jammu and Kashmir, and border areas in the north-eastern states of India. The permits are valid for six months. Indian citizens who have been arrested and released on bail are required to report regularly to local police authorities. In these instances judicial permission is required to relocate to another part of the country (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2003, DFAT 254 India RRT Information Request IND16042, 13 October – Attachment 30).

4. How would a Muslim butcher prepare meat (and particularly chicken) in such a way to satisfy Islamic religious requirements?

A Muslim butcher would prepare meat and chicken according to the Islamic method of slaughter called Halal. The National Halal website provides the following information.

What are the origins and benefits of Halal?

Food is everyone’s favorite subject and we generally all love to eat meat. So why go to so much trouble to go to a Muslim Butcher rather than obtaining meat from a supermarket?

Historically, all three monotheistic religions of the world – Judaism, Christianity and Islam prohibited eating blood and eating dead or strangled animals. As time went by, for some reason Christian scholars gave up the biblical slaughter practice but the Jews and the Muslim’s have not. They continue to practice the good guided method of slaughter. For the Jews this is derived from the Old Testament and Rabbinical Law. For Muslims, this is of course derived from the Holy Qur’an and the Hadith. All animals should be treated kindly and with consideration in Islam. As Muslims, we are told to respect all Allah’s (God’s) creatures and to look after them. Muslim’s are commanded to be Allah’s deputies over all creations on this Earth. This must therefore be reflected in the way animals are reared and prepared for slaughter. Muslims should be wholeheartedly opposed to the battery rearing of chickens; to veal calves being kept in cramped crates; to the movement of live animals across long distances in cruel conditions and to the way of slaughter in Europe in general. Furthermore, Muslim slaughterhouses should not treat animals with cruelty and disrespect. A Hadith from Mishkawth reads; “if a person unjustly kills a sparrow or even a smaller bird for food, he will have to answer for it before Allah (God). One is not allowed to kill for game”.

What is Halal?

Halal means lawful and permitted in Islam, according to Islamic Law. It can, and is applied to any subject matter. In terms of food, there are certain products that Islamic Law does not allow Muslims to consume. These forbidden foods or ingredients are known as Haram – which means unlawful or prohibited. In relation to food and drink, the main items that are haram (not permitted) under Islamic Law are alcohol , any part of a pig ,carrion (meat of dead animals) carnivorous animals, and blood. Islamic Law also stipulates that all meat consumed must be from animals that have been slaughtered in accordance to Islamic Law, thus making it Halal or acceptable for consumption. To satisfy Islamic Law, slaughter is done by cutting the animal’s jugular vein as this includes rapid and complete bleeding (as blood is thought to be the main carrier of diseases which could be passed to humans).

What is Halal method of slaughtering?

Contrary to popular belief, the methods employed in the production and preparation of Halal meat are one of the most humane and hygienic. Central to the Halal method is the treatment of the animals with the utmost respect and the slaughtering with the minimum amount of pain. The actual slaughtering method used means, unlike western methods, the animal is totally relaxed and consequently there is very little increase in adrenaline resulting in more tender meat. The draining of the blood and the removal of the spinal cord means that all bacteria and toxins are removed from the meat, resulting in a longer shelf life. Any worries about BSE are also eliminated as all National Halal Food Group animals are not fed on artificial feed products (‘All About Halal’ 2002, National Halal website http://www.nationalhalal.com/halal.php – Accessed 12 June 2007 – Attachment 31).

According to the al-islam1 website, meat of cow, goat, beef, chicken, sheep and camel are allowed to be consumed under Islamic law. “There are other exotic meats that may be allowed and some are Makruh (recommended to avoid eating them). Yet there are other animals whose meat is absolutely forbidden like Pig (Pork), animals of prey (Lion, Tiger, Leopard, etc)”. Mustafa Jaffer argues that slaughtering animals have to be done in the following manner:

1) The animal has to face Quibla [Towards Mecca] 2) The person slaughtering has to be a Muslim 3) The person slaughtering has to recite Bismillah [Muslim prayer] 4) Blood flowing out of the animal has to be left to take its natural course until the animal’s body is empty of blood 5) Make the animal drink some water before slaughtering (Recommended) 6) Do not let the animal see the knife or implement used for slaughtering (Recommended) 7) Use a sharp knife or implement for slaughtering (Recommended)

After slaughtering, any person (Muslim or not) can handle the meat and carve it into pieces to be used for cooking.

It has to be washed before cooking and after washing, only Muslims should touch it or, if non Muslims were to touch it, then with gloves as contact with a Najis person (Kafir) will make the meat najis [unsuitable] and haraam [unIslamic] to eat.

The meat, if fried, cannot be fried in Animal Fat or lard particularly from animals that have not been slaughtered according to Islamic Sharia. If there is enough evidence to confirm that the Animal Fat used to fry the meat is from animals slaughtered according to Sharia, then it is OK (‘Halal Meat and Meat Preparation’ 1998, al-islam1 website, 23 September http://al- islam1.org/organizations/AalimNetwork/msg00765.html – Accessed 12 June 2007 – Attachment 32).

List of Sources Consulted

Internet Sources: Government Information & Reports US Department of State website www.state.gov UK Home Office website www.homeoffice.gov.uk Non-Government Organisations People’s Union of Civil Liberties website www.onlinevolunteers.org Human Rights Watch website www.hrw.org International News & Politics BBC website www.bbc.co.uk Telegraph website www.telegraph.co.uk Guardian Unlimited website www.guardian.co.uk Kavkazcenter website www.kavkazcenter.com Region Specific Links Daily Times website www.dailytimes.co.pk The Economic Times website www.economictimes.indiatimes.com Counter Currents website www.countercurrents.org Topic Specific Links Islam Online website www.islamonline.net Indian Muslims website www.indianmuslims.info India Daily website www.indiadaily.com The Hindu website www.hindu.com India Together website www.indiatogether.org Sabrang website www.sabrang.com National Halal website www.nationalhalal.com Al-islam1 website www.al-islam1.org Designer History website www.designerhistory.com Eurindia website http://eurindia.pc.unicatt.it/english/home_eng.html

Search Engines Google search engine http://www.google.com.au/ Exalead search engine www.exalead.com

Databases: FACTIVA (news database) BACIS (DIMA Country Information database) REFINFO (IRBDC (Canada) Country Information database) ISYS (RRT Country Research database, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, US Department of State Reports) RRT Library Catalogue

List of Attachments

1. Jaffrelot, J. 2003, ‘Communal Riots in Gujarat: The State at Risk?’, Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics, Working paper No. 17, July http://archiv.ub.uni- heidelberg.de/volltextserver/volltexte/2003/4127/pdf/hpsacp17.pdf – Accessed 8 November 2006.

2. RRT Country Research 2006, Research Response IND31126, 19 December.

3. RRT Country Research 2006, Research Response IND30931, 16 November.

4. ‘Scores killed in India train attack’ 2002, BBC News website, 27 February http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1843591.stm – Accessed 8 November 2006.

5. Kamdar, M 2002, ‘The Struggle for India’s Soul’, World Policy Journal website, vol. XIX, no. 3 http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/articles/wpj02-3/kamdar.html – Accessed 8 November 2006.

6. Bedi, R. 2002, ‘Soldiers ‘held back to allow Hindus revenge’, Telegraph, 4 March http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/03/04/whind04.xml – Accessed 7 June 2007. 7. Harding, L. 2002, ‘Police took part in slaughter’, Guardian Unlimited, 3 March http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4366650,00.html – Accessed 7 June 2007.

8. Sisodia, R. 2007, ‘India’s Gujarat: Five Years in Agony’, Islam Online, 16 May http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1178724225641&page name=Zone-English-Muslim_Affairs%2FMAELayout – Accessed 7 June 2007.

9. Engineer, A. A. 2006, ‘Communal Riots 2005’, Indian Muslims, 20 January http://www.indianmuslims.info/reports_about_indian_muslims/communal_riots_2005 _asghar_ali_engineer.html – Accessed 7 June 2007.

10. ‘Vadodara: Violence on Gujarat’s Gaurav Day’ 2006, People’s Union for Civil Liberties website, 1 – 13 May http://www.onlinevolunteers.org/gujarat/reports/pucl/interim_may2k6.pdf – Accessed 7 June 2006.

11. ‘Hindu-Muslim clash in Indian Gujarat’ 2006, Daily Times, 29 May http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C05%5C29%5Cstory_29-5- 2006_pg7_5 – Accessed 6 June 2007.

12. ‘Gujarat police accused of inaction, again’ 2006, The Economic Times, 7 June http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1516911.cms – Accessed 7 June 2007.

13. ‘Parliament rocked by Gujarat fake encounter killings’ 2007, India Daily, 7 May http://www.indiadaily.com/breaking_news/89339.asp – Accessed 7 June 2007.

14. ‘Gujarat Muslim Killings were authorized’ 2007, Kavkazcenter website, 9 May source: Indo-Asian News Service (9 May 2007) http://kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2007/05/09/8245.shtml – Accessed 6 June 2007.

15. ‘Gujarat govt confirms Kausar Bi’s death, investigating officer removed’ 2007, Hindustan Times, 30 April. (FACTIVA)

16. Mohammed, Z. 2007, ‘Truth Trickles Out: The Gujarat Pogrom Five Years Later’, Counter Currents, 2 March http://www.countercurrents.org/guj- janmohamad020307.htm – Accessed 7 June 2007.

17. Deepa, A. 2007, ‘Segregated and building their own schools’, India Together website, 5 February http://www.indiatogether.org/2007/feb/edu-embattled.htm – Accessed 6 June 2007.

18. RRT Country Research Response 2006, Research Response IND30469, 11 August.

19. RRT Country Research Response 2006, Research Response IND30864, 7 November.

20. ‘Don’t politicise issue: Deshmukh’ 2006, The Hindu, 10 July http://www.hindu.com/2006/07/10/stories/2006071015341400.htm – Accessed 8 June 2007. 21. ‘BJP, Shiv Sena protest against visa denial to Modi’ 2005, The Hindu, 20 March http://www.hindu.com/2005/03/20/stories/2005032010050300.htm – Accessed 8 June 2007.

22. ‘Crime Against Humanity: Volume Two’, 2002, Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal, Sabrang website, 21 November http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/tribunal2.pdf – Accessed 26 April 2007.

23. Crime Against Humanity: Volume Three’ 2002, Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal, Sabrang website, 21 November http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/tribunal3.pdf – Accessed 26 April 2007.

24. RRT Country Research 2005, Research Response IND17525, 26 September.

25. RRT Country Research 2007, Research Response IND31849, 6 June.

26. US Department of State 2006, International Religious Freedom Report for 2006 – India, 19 September.

27. US Department of State 2007, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006 – India, 6 March.

28. UK Home Office 2007, Operational Guidance Note: India, 20 February, Section 3.8.

29. Human Rights Watch 2007, World Report – India, January.

30. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2003, DFAT 254 India RRT Information Request IND16042, 13 October.

31. ‘All About Halal’ 2002, National Halal website http://www.nationalhalal.com/halal.php – Accessed 12 June 2007.

32. ‘Halal Meat and Meat Preparation’ 1998, al-islam1 website, 23 September http://al- islam1.org/organizations/AalimNetwork/msg00765.html – Accessed 12 June 2007.