|
A cremation and a burial: Democracy v/s
Dictatorship
In their rush to scribble newspaper articles arguing
a line that the Indian state would love to hear, many journalists
have succumbed to the temptation to compare Lal Masjid flushing out
operation by the Pakistani commandoes to the Operation Bluestar
attack on Golden Temple in Amritsar conducted by the Indian army and
the state.
While we in the last edition of the WSN have made it clear how the
two are as different as chalk and cheese, I am now on the very
narrow subject of dealing with the body of the leader in the two
cases.
It is all the more important and appropriate at this moment to
discuss the issue since Sardar Apar Singh Bajwa, who the army tasked
with identifying the body of Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, has
just died and this very issue of the WSN carries a detailed report
on the man and his views.
The Operation Bluestar was conducted in the times of Doordarshan,
while the Lal Masjid happened in times of hundred channels blooming.
The electronic media in Pakistan is fast coming into its own and the
coverage of Lal Masjid as also of the earlier confrontation between
the judiciary and the executive have been milestones in the history
of development of electronic media norms in Pakistan.
But we are currently on the role of the government and its various
wings. If there was anyone who could have justifiably claimed the
body of the Sant, it was either the Damdami Taksal that he headed,
or his family. Alternatively, the government could have called any
group of Sikh leaders, or scholars and handed over the body. It
could also have put restrictions on the crowd at the cremation or
ensured a private burial by the family or any chosen group. Instead,
it asked a police officer to identify the body. The claims of
others, of an entire community, were brushed aside. How many days it
took the Sikhs and even the Damdami Taksal to actually come to the
conclusion about the death of the Sant?
And for how long the people were prevented from visiting the Golden
Temple? How did the Indian judiciary react to the way the Sant's
body was disposed, or for that matter the bodies of all the
innocents as well as militants who were admittedly killed inside the
Golden Temple?
Now, for those hell bent on comparing the Lal Masjid with the
Operation Bluestar, this is how the Pakistanis handled it. The
remains of Maulana Ghazi were brought to Basti Abdullah from
Islamabad by a helicopter after a dispute arose where to bury the
dead body. Maulana Ghazi's will stated that he was to be buried in
Islamabad.
Even though the government refused to
abide by the wish of the Maulana, on
Wednesday, the Supreme Court ordered that the body of Maulana Ghazi
should be buried as "amanat (for a temporary period)" in his native
town, Rojhan Mazari, Rajanpur. It heard the plea of the sisters of
Maulana Ghazi.
The two member bench of the apex court said that as the body has
been taken away to the area, so it should be buried as ‘amanat', to
be taken back to Islamabad at an appropriate time. The government
even allowed the detained Maulana Abdul Aziz in leading the funeral
prayers of his younger brother, though under stringent security
arrangements.
Now come to think of it. Which court in India would have admitted a
petition that fast to the effect that someone wanted the body of
Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale to be cremated at a particular
place? No one even bothered to approach India's justice dispensing
machinery. It says a lot about Indian establishment and the Sikhs'
faith in it.
For the record, Pakistan is a military dispensation,and India is the
world's largestdemocracy. We rest our case.
18 July, 2007
|
Read Also