[Reader-list] Teesta Setalvad cooked up macabre tales on Gujarat Riots : SIT

[Pawan Durani]

An interesting petition i just found on internet ......No comments from my
side .....but the petition is worth reading............
http://www.petitiononline.com/ngoi/petition.html

To:  Supreme Court Of India, CBI (India), Press Council Of India

Appeal to maintain the sanctity of India's judicial system

To:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.C. LAHOTI, Chief Justice of Supreme Court Of India.

SHRI U.S. MISRA, Director CBI

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, Chairman Press Council of India.

As events in the trial of the Best Bakery case unfold, the man on the street
looks on in askance where exactly the truth lies. On one side is a much
maligned but democratically elected government of Gujarat that is charged
and on the other is a highly pampered but suspicious NGO who leads the
attack and in the middle is a simple, 20-year old girl. The case pertaining
to the Best Bakery massacre has become more of a contrivance to score
political points than to execute justice. It is unfortunate that courts all
the way to the apex court in India have fallen prey to this political
tussle.

It is the appeal of the undersigned that restraint is followed in making
judgments and the fact be examined that NGOs themselves might have vested
interests.

Zaheera Sheikh’s allegations against the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace
and its counselor Teesta Setalvad carry criminal ramifications. In her own
words Zaheera admitted that she perceived a threat to her life from activist
Teesta Setalvad. She further narrated how she was abducted at knifepoint at
the behest of Ms. Setalvad. In a rare admission she alleged *"Teesta forced
me into changing my earlier deposition. She threatened me with dire
consequences if I did not follow her instructions."*

For an NGO that belabors endlessly on communal harmony, Ms Setalvad’s
approach to the Best Bakery case appears not to be one of conciliation but
rooted in widening the communal chasm when one hears Zaheera narrate *“When
I asked her what she wanted, she said, 'You have to fight for your
community, for which even if you have to tell lies, you'll have to tell lies
before court.”* Zaheera Sheikh has also charged Ms Setalvad of holding her
captive and threatening her of lynching!

One must also note that since her allegation against Ms Setalvad, Zaheera
Sheikh has also sought the counsel and protection of National Committee for
Minorities (NCM) and The National Commission for Women (NCW). She met with
Ms Poornima Advani of the NCW in the week of Nov 8-14 in this connection. Ms
Advani it should be recalled has constantly fought for the human rights of
those affected by the Gujarat incidents. While, the Gujarat government has
been insidiously charged by all and sundry of having coerced Zaheera into
her latest volte-face - after her meeting Ms Advani welcomed Zaheera’s
stance and rejected allegations of illegal pressure by the Gujarat Govt. She
confirmed to the press that *“Zaheera was under no pressure and was doing
her own things”.*

It must be further noted that allegations of threat against Ms. Setalvad are
not just from Zaheera Sheikh alone. A day after Zaheera Sheikh sought police
protection from Ms. Setalvad, an accused in the case Dinesh Rajbhar told
special judge A M Thipsay that Setalvad had 'threatened' him while being
taken out of the court in Mumbai. The court has taken the complaint of Ms.
Setalvad’s threat in the words - *"Hum tum sab ko dekh lenge* (We will see
you)” - on record.

It has been noticed several times that many NGOs in India have been exposed
as tax shelters and sophisticated social swindles. It has also been noted
that many NGOs do have vested foreign interests whose ultimate interest is
what NGOs champion. It is our appeal therefore that the courts, based on the
petitions by NGOs whose credentials may be questionable, not execute
landmark decisions. In light of the serious allegations the star witness of
the Best Bakery has made against the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace and
its forerunner Teesta Setalvad, this becomes very important.


The role of the Ms Teesta Setalvad and her interest for state of India are
more than dubious. If anything, Ms. Teesta Setalvad is hardly an NGO and
driven impetuously against only a certain political ideology. She publishes
“Communalism Combat”. Ostensibly a publication for communal harmony, its
real purpose and effect appear to be directed at communal polarization.
Sabrang Communications (Private) Ltd that she jointly operates with her
husband Javed Anand has a history of coordinating several political
activities with a common theme: attack democratically elected governments in
India, and slander them abroad, and conduct anti-Indian propaganda.

We also appeal to the CBI to investigate the funds received by Ms Setalvad
and her NGO for political pamphleteering. There have been indications that
Sabrang Communications has been soliciting foreign funding giving the
address of one SINGH foundation in the United States. In fact per Zaheera
Sheikh’s revelation to press persons, Ms. Setalvad even threatened Zaheera
with her monetary clout – as Zaheera narrated *"I told Teesta I would lodge
a complaint against her with Vadodara police and expose her, but Teesta
replied, 'We are very rich and influential. You can't harm us that way.”*

Who should we believe? The battle has been drawn out between a very powerful
woman who is on the board of several government offices, is in close
association with corporate houses, has been felicitated overseas with sundry
awards and in defence is a hapless young girl barely out of her teens,
bereaved and homeless. Ms Setalvad's loyalties are at best "divided" - she
has consistently used a secessionist map of India on her web-site and
viciously attacked Indian musicians who asked for equivalent access to
Pakistani markets, as offered to Pakistani musicians here. Her current
effort at undermining an indigent, inadequately educated girl, barely out of
her teens, is avidly supported by Pakistanis and organizations that align
themselves with the NDF-ISI nexus. Do we really want such a person and her
coterie to affect our judicial system?

This petition is also an appeal of the undersigned to the Press Council of
India to advise restrain on the astounding one-sidedness of press reporting.
Even though Zahira Sheikh’s reputation appears tarnished with her constant
about faces, her allegations against Ms. Setalvad must be investigated
without prejudice. The press must be cautious in making slanted reports that
may be construed as a defense of Ms. Setalvad. While the truth remains
muddied, speculation in the press is rife about Zaheera’s character, stories
are being made up about greed and letting down her community. For example
with little or no corroborating evidence, India’s leading daily in English
had a sensational headline titled “'Zahira retracted for money'. Another
nationally syndicated columnist devoted an entire op-ed in defense of Teesta
Setalvad without even the minimum of investigation into any of Zaheera’s
charges. If anything the press must be wary of bogus peace and human rights
activists that abound in India working for foreign interests.

We the undersigned strongly protest that we do not want the Indian judicial
system, the investigating agencies and the press be held hostage by
individuals with questionable intentions, NGOs with unaccounted sources of
funding. Further, NGOs who have no accountability to anyone should not be
allowed to affect or even direct our judicial process, especially if they
have foreign funding. It is important that fly-by-night organizations like
one Ms. Setalvad has been running not malign and undermine India’s judicial
system.


Sincerely,

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Anuj Bhuwania <anujbhuwania at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> It is perhaps worth noting that the only newspaper that reported the
> Court proceedings in such terms, is the  Times of India and its sister
> publication Economic Times. Please find pasted below Teesta Setalvad's
> rebuttal to this Times of India news report quoted already in the
> first email posted on this thread.
>
> Best,
> anuj
>
> Rebuttal  to the Times of India report,  dated April 14, 2009:
>
> The report in The Times of India, Mumbai edition dated April 14, 2009,
> reportedly also published prominently in all its other editions
> titled, ‘NGOs, Teesta spiced up Gujarat riots cases: SIT’ is a clear
> example of irresponsible reportage. Intentionally or otherwise, the
> distorted report damages the reputation of a citizens’ group that has
> been recognized nationally and internationally for working assiduously
> to ensure justice to the victims of mass violence whether in case of
> the Gujarat carnage (2002), or the bomb blasts in Mumbai (2006 and
> 2008) or the communal carnage in Kandhamal district, Orissa (2008),
> irrespective of the caste or creed of the victims or the perpetrators.
>
> “The SIT led by former CBI director R K Raghavan told the Supreme
> Court on Monday…” reads the opening para of the report. The fact is
> that neither Sri Raghavan, nor any other SIT member was present at the
> apex court to “tell” it anything. Sri Dhananjay Mahapatra’s report
> could only be referring to a contention made in a four page note
> circulated by Ms Hemantika Wahi for the Gujarat Government. (A copy of
> the same is annexed). It was not a note prepared by SIT. The report is
> all the more shocking since Sri Mahapatra was present in the court and
> could not be unaware of this.
>
> The detailed report of SIT submitted to the Supreme Court on March 6,
> 2007 has not been available for study either to National Human Rights
> Commission (NHRC), the petitioners in this case, or the Citizens for
> Justice and Peace (CJP) who have intervened in this critical matter or
> to any in the media. Any reference to it is hence hearsay and it may
> amount to contempt of court to write about a report which the Court
> has specifically not made public.
>
> In its written note that the Gujarat state circulated in court
> yesterday, the state has given its brief comments on the SIT report.
> In para four of this note the Gujarat government note refers to
> alleged statements made by some witnesses in the Gulberg case before
> SIT that name accused other than those named by them in the written
> statements that were (according to the state of Gujarat) given to them
> by Teesta Setalvad and advocates. This is the version of the Gujarat
> state. Besides this, Mukul Rohatgi tried to make a populist speech in
> court saying that incidents like the Kauser Bano case etc never
> happened.  The Supreme Court disregarded this argument and did not
> allow Mr.Rohatgi to read anything from the report. The court went on
> to state that they were not interested in personal allegations and
> only ensuring that, like in the course of the Zahira Shaikh case, the
> trials are fair, the truth comes out and the course of justice is
> served.
>
> It is necessary to recalled that in the course of the Best Bakery
> trial, too, the Gujarat government had tried to divert the court’s
> attention by engineering charges against Teesta Setalvad, secretary
> CJP and by implication the NGO. On Setalvad’s application to the apex
> court for a full fledged inquiry the report of the Registrar of the
> apex court exonerated Setalvad and the NGO completely.
>
> As reported by the rest of the national media, on Monday, ignoring Sri
> Rohatgi’s bid to side-step the main issues, the three-member bench of
> the Supreme Court remained focused on the modalities of setting up
> designated courts for the trial of the accused in the post-Godhra riot
> cases in Gujarat. Instead of highlighting the court proceedings, Sri
> Mahapatra chose to spice up his report focusing not on the
> deliberations or the intentions of the apex court but to promote the
> case of the Gujarat government.
>
> The moot question is whether or not 2,500 persons were killed in a
> ghastly perpetrated massacre following the tragic burning alive of 59
> persons on the Sabarmati express; whether or not ex parliamentarian
> Ahsan Jafri was mutilated before being burnt alive, whether the bodies
> of the missing dead (over 220) have not been found or returned for
> dignified burial after seven long years? All the national media was
> witness to this national tragedy.
>
>  In the interests of fair reportage and to ensure that the reputation
> of a citizens group committed to equity and justice is not
> deliberately vitiated before the trials commence, the newspaper should
> carry this rebuttal in full. A failure to do so will result in the
> columns of a national newspaper being used to distort facts, shape
> public perception and seek to influence the outcome of due process of
> law and justice to the victims of mass murder.
>
> (Statement by Citizens for Justice and Peace, Mumbai, April 14, 2009,
> Mumbai)
>
> We wish also that the following issues be highlighted by you in a box
> though the word length goes over your report.
>
> Pertinent issues ignored in the report:
>
>    * The arrests of minister Dr Maya Kodnani and Dr Jaideep Patel in
> the past weeks were on the basis of SIT re-investigations. Twelve FIRs
> filed by witnesses naming these accused in 2002 had been clubbed into
> a magnum FIR by the Ahmedabad crime branch that had dropped the names
> of these powerful accused;
>    *   The arrests of investigating officer KG Erda in the Gulberg
> case and of other policemen in the other cases over the past months
> has meant the claims of witness survivors and legal rights groups,
> prima facie, are valid;
>    *  That this was one of the issues why the apex court has chosen
> to appoint SIT, the full scale subversion of the process of justice,
> from the removal of names of accused who’s names appeared in earlier
> statements simply because they enjoyed political patronage; the
> appointment of prosecutors with allegiances to the BJP and VHP which
> meant instead of promoting fair trial they sided with the politically
> powerful and protected accused;
>    *    More pertinently the tragic slaying of pregnant Kauser Bano
> at Naroda Patiya after slitting her womb was reported  in Deccan
> Herald,(April 17, 2004) and The Indian Express, (March 23,2005) among
> others apart from finding place in innumerable reports including the
> one authored by the Concerned Citizens Tribunal-Crimes Against
> Humanity 2002 headed by two Supreme Court judges, Justices Krishna
> Iyer and PB Sawant. Similarly the British national case was similarly
> documented apart from being covered in The Pioneer, March 3, 2002 and
> The Hindu, April 23, 2002.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Dear all
> >
> > The fact of the matter is that even official statistics show that more
> than
> > 1,000 died in these 'riots', if one were to call them that. However, a
> riot
> > is not organized but is a spontaneous reaction to an event or a chain of
> > events which took place. This was a well planned genocide, for there were
> > people talking on mobiles directing people to attack at various places,
> > police was sleeping or not functioning, the RAF could not be contacted as
> > telephone lines were cut, and interestingly even many people are
> registered
> > as missing even now, 7 years after the gory incidents.
> >
> > Every time one talks about these, Godhra is mentioned. Was anybody raped
> in
> > Godhra? Was anybody taunted in Godhra? Weren't the VHP workers creating
> > problems for other passengers by occupying reserved seats? What were they
> > doing occupying reserved seats while having unreserved tickets for
> > themselves? Why was it so that a certain number of passengers could not
> be
> > identified days after the incident? Why was no official railway inquiry
> > ordered within 48 hours of the incident by the Railway Ministry, as is
> often
> > the case when any incident pertaining to this ministry takes place?
> >
> > Nobody answers these questions.
> >
> > Then about avenging Godhra. Even if one were to logically look at it, why
> > should Godhra be avenged in Gujarat? It should be avenged in Godhra only
> > (logically looking from the anguished ones' angle). Why was it required
> to
> > target Ahmedabad Muslims for what happened in Godhra? Did these Muslims
> go
> > and do it there? Or did they support their activities?
> >
> > And how are rapes justified as avenging Godhra? If that is the case, then
> > wouldn't a Muslim who lost everything in such 'riots' be justified in
> > avenging it by raping the mother/sister of some member of this forum
> > (including me) just because he/she is a Hindu? Is that right?
> >
> > Teesta Satalvad or no Teesta Satalvad, what is required is punishment of
> the
> > perpetrators in the strongest terms to set an example before the society
> > that those who indulge in such violence would get what they deserve and
> > shouldn't expect any mercy. It should act as a case of impartial justice
> > delivered in the quickest possible time. And if Godhra accused can be put
> > under POTA, all those involved in such killings anywhere and anytime
> should
> > be punished under UAPA.
> >
> > I hope that the SIT achieves this to a certain extent, and I would like
> to
> > look at the report before making any remarks. Newspaper clippings and
> media
> > have a sense to distort the entire thing, and even a portion or paragraph
> > can be cited to change the context in which the comments were put up. I
> > think the report is confidential as the matter is sub-judice. However, if
> > the report is available, please do inform me (and indeed all of us) for
> the
> > same.
> >
> > And for me, justice is more important, irrespective of there is Teesta or
> no
> > Teesta; Pawan Durani or no Pawan Durani; Aditya Raj Kaul or no Aditya Raj
> > Kaul, Rakesh Iyer or no Rakesh Iyer.
> >
> > And as a society, that is the goal we must strive towards, not Ram
> > Mandir/Babri Masjid, not SEZ's or interlinking of rivers or other such
> > faulty schemes, not temples of Modern India or huge dams, but means to
> > improve livelihood of people and securing justice for them.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Rakesh
> > _________________________________________
> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > Critiques & Collaborations
> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>