“(SECULAR) Emperor Stands Naked”.

DEAR SIR,

Reference the Article “The tale of the unpunished”_(TNIE-16 AUG). Jyoti Punwani wrote: ” Bal Thackeray had instructed his ‘boys’ that ‘not a single landya should survive,even to give oral evidence”. This,according to the deposition of journalist Yuvraj Mohite before the Justice Srikrishna Commission.

With a “SECULAR ENGLISH MEDIA”- citizens of this country, earlier, never got to know ‘the other side of the story’. Thanks to the NET, this is no longer the case! The citizen now has the necessary input to take an ‘informed decision’, on any issue. The earlier the print media understands this phenomenon, the better!!

The ‘Yuvraj Mohite’ story is one such case!! He is a senior journalist with the Mumbai eveninger ‘Mahanagar’, whose mission statement is to take on the Shiv Sena. Fair enough.

On 8th January 1993 at about 1900 hours, Shri Mohite is closeted with the then Mayor of Mumbai, Shri Chandrakant Handore who is a member of the Republican Party of India. The Congress party had an alliance with RPI in the municipal elections, and together were the ruling combination. The Mayor desired that the Hindu political and the Muslim leaders to sign a joint appeal to the people to exercise restraint and maintain peace. Shri Mohite himself wrote out a draft of the appeal in duplicate. The Mayor informed the media about his
plan. He invited Mohite to come along with him to get the leaders to sign. They are accompanied by the Mayor’s Personal Assistant. They first go to the house of Haji Mastan to obtain his signature. They then proceed to the residence of the Shiv Sena chief, Balasaheb Thackeray,and arrive at 2130 hours. It is here that Mohite hears Bal Thackeray’s ‘orders’ being conveyed telephonically. At about 2315h the Mayor drops Mohite near his newspaper office at Mahim.

On Jan 9, 93, at 0200h the editor, Nikhil Wagle, comes to the office and  Mohite reports what happened. The editor says that the Chief Minister must be contacted and informed what happened. Mohite contacts the Mayor, who is not ready to go to the Chief Minster. The editor phones the Minister of State for Home, Shri Babanrao Pachpute, to inform him what transpired at Balasaheb’s residence. The minister informed him that he would take urgent steps in the matter. At around 0900h, Mohite writes out his article so that the same could be printed in the newspaper. This was allegedly not done since it would vitiate the atmosphere further. Later this is called the first draft. (This is as per the witness statement of Shri Mohite. However, the Commission report (para 9.13 pg 175) says that it was prepared in the first week of Feb.)

In Feb ’93, Mohite prepares a second and a longer draft of what transpired at the Balasaheb’s residence on Jan 8,and  is given for translation into English. (However, the Commission report (para 9.13 pg 175) says that both these events happened in the end of Feb.).

Cut to April ’93. English translation was given to Mohite. The material was handed over to an advocate, MP Vashi, for preparing an affidavit to be filed before the Commission. Vashi takes an unduly long time and the date for filing affidavits expires. On April 6, ’93 an editorial appears in Mahanagar narrating what is supposed to have happened on January 8. The editorial says that the full details would be given at an ‘appropriate time’.  April ,’93,Mahanagar carries a news item that the Mayor has threatened Mohite for disclosing the whole set of events that were supposed to have happened at Balasaheb’s residence.

Now cut to October,’93.The affidavit is finally ready. Since the time for filing given by the Commission had been extended, the same is filed.

June ’97, Shri Mohite is examined before the Commission.Talk of ‘urgency’ in dealing with criminal cases!! The story speaks for itself!! And our ‘seculars’ never tire of quoting Yuvraj Mohite!! The strange aspect of the proceedings was that the Commisssion ‘never’ questioned the Mayor to corroborate Mohite’s deposition!! Strange indeed!! Also, and even more interesting, The Commission had directed the ‘Tata Institute of Social Sciences’to undertake an analysis of the causative factors for the riots from the perspective of socio-economic, demographic and political factors.For reasons ‘unknown’, the Commission did not deem it ‘fit’ to include the TISS report as an Appendix to the Commission’s Final Report!! The TISS report ‘bluntly’ stated the FACTS which would raise the bile in our ‘seculars’!!

This Article reminds me of another similar story that was carried by our ‘SECULAR ENGLISH’ dailies during Gujarat 2002!! Booker Prize winner, Arundhati Roy went lyrical about the torture of a Muslim politician’s ‘TWO DAUGHTERS’ by ‘saffron Hindu FACISTS’!! ONLY A SMALL MATTER OF DETAIL.THE SAID POLITICIAN HAD ‘ONLY ONE DAUGHTER’!! And,as it invariably happens in our ‘SECUALR STORIES’-the said daughter happened to be in the “U.S.A.” at the time of the ‘FACTUAL STORY’!!

Jyoti Punwani’s Article is an interesting example of how ‘truths’ can be so easily constructed and perceptions so easily altered depending on how an issue is introduced, how an argument is developed,what facts are highlighted, what details are selected and what are ignored. Basically, it lies in how the ‘STORY’ is told!!

Regrettably the “(SECULAR) EMPEROR STANDS NAKED”.

VANDE MATARAM

Responses