We have here with me a report entitled Crime Against Humanity. On November 21, 2002, the Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal consisting of several eminent citizens and headed by Justice V. Krishna Iyer, made public this report on the Gujarat carnage which began on 27th / 28th February, 2002. This report was on the basis of more than 2000 oral and written testimonies, both individual and collective, from victim-survivors and also independent Human Rights’ Groups. NGOs, academics and others. The Tribunal, in its findings and recommendations, clearly indicts the Government of Gujarat and holds it responsible for the unfettered violence, murder, arson and loot that took place in Gujarat last year. This violence, (though not an ‘action-reaction’ syndrome) followed the burning of the S-6 compartment of the Sabarmati Express in Godhra and the death of fifty-nine people.

What took place in Gujarat has already been well-documented in studies, analyses, reports by fact-finding teams, human rights’ groups, statutory bodies like the National Human Rights’ Commission (NHRC) and the media, besides others. I don’t think it is important to get into the nitty-gritty of the events. The details of the carnage are gory and horrendous: almost 2,000 Muslims were killed, many more were injured or brutalized, several hundreds of women were raped and the extent of damage to homes and establishments can hardly be quantified. Gujarat has not yet recovered from the massive losses incurred by every strata of society during the past year.

The major trends which emerged from each of these reports (including the Human Rights’ Watch Report of 2003) and which corroborate the findings of the Citizens’ Tribunal are:

> what took place in Gujarat was not merely communal violence or riots; it was a genocide, a carnage, an ethnic cleansing, designed to wipe out or to ostracize a whole community.

> the carnage was well planned and well executed. It was not a ‘spontaneous’ reaction as it was made out to be. The preparations must have taken several months. Already a year earlier, a widely circulated Gujarati daily listed several hotels run by the Chilya community which had non-Islamic names. Most of them were razed to the ground during the carnage. A meticulous census was conducted on the Muslims and Christians of Gujarat in 1999. The data was sufficient to help rampaging mobs to know exactly whom to attack and where.

> the carnage was meant to break the economic backbone of the Muslim community. It has succeeded to a great extent.

> in the middle-class (including several well-to-do and educated women) were blatantly involved in the violence. There were very few who were willing to come out and take a stand to prevent what was happening.

> in some areas, tribals and dalits were very effectively used in the arson and looting of Muslim homes and establishments.

> it was a State-sponsored genocide: The Citizens’ Tribunal has clearly indicted several high-ranking bureaucrats and police-officials, besides the Chief Minister and politicians. The Sangh Parivar was given a free hand to do what it wanted. The police were apparently given clear instructions not to take any action. There is also evidence to show that some were encouraged to join in the violence, which they did with ruthless finesse. State Ministers and leaders of ‘the Parivar’ were seen leading the mobs.

Today, a full year has run…The question that is frequently asked is whether everything is ‘normal’ and whether ‘peace’ has actually returned to Gujarat. A cue to this question was given by the noted industrialist Rahul Bajaj when, at a meeting of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) in New Delhi recently, he pointedly demanded from the Gujarat Chief Minister, whether he could ensure that the events of 2002 – a year he characterized as a lost one for Gujarat – would not be repeated. The response from the Chief Minister was typical: he ranted and raved and accused the likes of Bajaj, Godrej and ‘their pseudo-secularist friends’ for spoiling the name of Gujarat. To put things in their proper perspective: the question asked by Mr. Bajaj is definitely loaded. It is a reiteration of the fact that life in Gujarat is still not yet normal, that peace has still not returned.

Yes, there is an apparent ‘normalcy’ in the State. For an outsider, the city of Ahmedabad and other parts of Gujarat may seem fairly all right. This indeed is far from the truth; beneath this superficiality is a reality which is grim and highly explosive. The reality is this:

 • if one is a Muslim today, one cannot buy a house or own a shop in the western up-market area of the city.    Muslims are normally confined to ghettos in the eastern part or in some rare pockets in the western part of    Ahmedabad city.
 • most Muslims in Gujarat continue to live in fear and insecurity.
 • an insignificant incident can spark off a major riot.
 • State-sponsored terrorism continues with frightening regularity. In the past year, several Muslim youth have    been killed in ‘police encounters’.
 • in Vadodara recently, several young Muslims were detained under the Prevention of Anti-Social Activity Act    (PASA) and a respected Muslim cleric was recently arrested for allegedly being one of the masterminds of    the Godhra burning. All these arrests are apparently unwarranted.
 • on December 31st 2002, a group of Muslims were attacked in the town of Dahod and their homes set on    fire. 45 days later, more than 600 of them are still languishing in a relief camp organized by the Muslim    Ghanchi Panch Relief Committee.
 • some of those who are accused of the violence against the Muslims have been elected as Members of the    Legislative Assembly (MLAs) and some have even become Ministers.
 • the Sangh Parivar continues its vicious campaign against the Muslims, Christians and other vulnerable    groups with impunity.

One needs to go back to March 1998 when the BJP won a two-third majority in Gujarat. It was the very first State in the country which gave them such a massive mandate with unqualified support. The build up to this victory was gradual but efficiently planned; that Gujarat was bound to become the laboratory for the Hindutva ideology was clear as daylight. The Bombay blast in a way contained aggressive posturing by the Hindu fundamentalists. The Muslims of Gujarat seemed to be more well organized and extremely prepared for any eventuality. An agenda was needed in order to consolidate their position in Gujarat. Governance or the needs of the people was never their top priority (or will ever be) so they chose a soft target: the Christians. With frightening regularity, from March 1998 onwards, Christians and their institutions were attacked. A huge Church, which was under construction was pulled down in Ahmedabad city by the Sangh Parivar mob. Several other Churches all over the Dangs and other parts of South Gujarat were attacked or burnt in December 1998 and January 1999.

Earlier, on December 4th 1998, more than 35,000 Christians marched through the streets of Ahmedabad in a protest rally against the attacks on Christians in Gujarat and other parts of India. For the first time, the fundamentalist elements were put on the defensive; though that did not stop them going on a rampage a few weeks later. The census on the Christians and Muslims which I have referred to earlier took place in February / March 1999 and in spite of a suo moto order by Justice Calla of the Gujarat High Court, the collection of data continued unabashedly.

After a hue and cry, nationally and internationally, the attacks on the Christians gradually subsided and became far apart. However, this posturing had already translated into very important parliamentary seats in the general elections of 1999. As February 2003 approached, the BJP definitely needed an agenda. All by-elections and other local elections held in 2000 and 2001, saw them loosing miserably in most constituencies. The attack on the World Trade Centre in New York on September 11, 2001 was just the ‘proper opening’ for the sinister designs of the Sangh Parivar. But they still were not sure whether attacking the Muslims in any way would help or would meet with further reprisals. Some of their local think-tanks were already suggesting that a low profile attack on Christians and Christian-institutions would pay richer dividends.

Finally, the ‘Godhra incident’ provided the trigger. All that followed is bitter history. That the State of Gujarat has become highly polarized and is literally sitting on a tinderbox is without a shade of a doubt. Whilst the terrible violence of the early months has taken a back-seat, a more sinister violence which screams through prejudices and hate-campaigns, is taking deeper and deeper root.

The BJP emerged triumphant in the elections of December 2002 romping home with a two-third majority. In spite of all its rhetoric (‘five crore Gujaratis!’) the actual numbers that voted BJP, were 8 million out of an officially estimated population of 50 million. Recent posturing and actions have clearly demonstrated that this victory is bound to heighten the intolerant, arrogant and discriminatory attitude of the ruling political bosses of the State. The use of PASA, the Freedom of Religion Bill, and the diatribe against those who stand up for justice and human rights, are clearly signs of things to come.

We need to wake up to the realities of Gujarat! The Gujarat model is not merely a case-study but provides us with concepts, definitions and activities – literally the ammunition – which need to be opposed tooth-and-nail. It also makes very clear, the challenges that one is confronted with, and provides us with an opportunity to spell out our response.

Before we get into areas of possible response, I would like to present a justification for it.

 • We have a mandate from the Scriptures:
   Scripture is full of relevant texts of our prophetic role eg. the book of Isaiah Chapter 58, the Prophet yells “cry    aloud, spare not, lift up your voice like a trumpet; declare to my people their transgression…”. In his    messianic proclamation (Luke 4) Jesus concretizes the “Good News”. A Prophet does not merely    announce, he also denounces.
 • We have a mandate from the Church’s teaching:
   Vatican II very strongly called for an up-to-date renewal of religious life.

Successive post-conciliar documents have emphasized the need and importance of renewing religious life in the context of the signs of the times. “Perfectae Caritatis” challenges us not merely to renew ourselves according to the signs of the times but to make our religious life more meaningful in this broken world. On 11th April, 1963, Pope John XXIII published his epic encyclical entitled Pacem In Terris. In that, he identified the essential conditions for peace in four precise requirements of the human spirit: truth, justice, love and freedom. In a message on the occasion of the World Day of Peace this year, Pope John Paul II extolled this encyclical and called for a permanent commitment. “Is it not time for all to work together for a new constitutional organization of the human family, truly capable of ensuring peace and harmony between peoples as well as their integral development?”

 • We have a mandate from our respective Religious Congregations:
   This clarion call has constantly been reiterated in our own General Congregations or Chapters.    Contemporary spirituality cannot be seen in isolation from the faith-justice mandate each of us has been    enjoined with. We therefore need to go back to the documents and statements that emerge from our own    Congregations. Too often, as religious, we permit beautifully worded texts to gather dust in our well-stocked    libraries.

I hope I do not sound too ‘arrogant’ when I dare quote from the Jesuit 34th General Congregation which very emphatically states:

“Today we realize clearly:

No service of faith without
Promotion of justice
entry into cultures
openness to other religious experiences.

No promotion of justice without
communicating faith
transforming cultures
collaboration with other traditions.

No inculturation without
communicating faith with others
dialogue with other traditions
commitment to justice.

No dialogue without
sharing faith with others
evaluating cultures
concern for justice.”

Therefore as Religious, we are mandated thrice over. This mandate has ultimately to be foundational, to motivate us, to inspire us, to ensure that we formulate appropriate responses relevant for the world we live in so that “the joy and hope, the grief and anguish of the men (and women) of our time especially of those who are poor or afflicted in any way, are the joy and hope, the grief and anguish of the followers of Christ as well”.

In July last year, I was honoured by the SVDs, when Fr. L. Stanislaus, the Director of Ishvani Kendra, invited me to deliver the Zeitler Memorial Lecture on “The Gujarat Carnage: Challenges and the Christian Response”. While elucidating on “the Christian response” I suggested ten possible responses. Many of them were inter-related and some seemed too simplistic for the learned gathering present there. Yet, I am convinced that if one has to respond to the emergence and the growth of fundamentalism in our country, we need to respond in a befitting manner. Above all, our response should not be from a position of defence – rather, it should be as I said earlier, of people who have a prophetic role to play in our times, who have the courage to announce and to denounce. I would therefore like to look into our response in a multi-dimensional way.

i. A Studied One

The investment that the Church in India has made in education is tremendous. We can easily boast of some of the premier institutions of formal education in the country. But how many centers do we have which are dedicated to social research and study; to human rights, justice and peace? These centers/institutions can be counted on our fingers. Some of them like SVDs’ ‘Ishvani Kendra’ and the Jesuit ‘Indian Social Institute’ have definitely made significant contributions both to the Church and to the country. Sadly, this is not sufficient.

We are aware that we have the potential, the capacity and the reach to do much more serious reflection, study and research; besides, we have the facilities to do so. Very often, our lack of involvement is due to ignorance. We do not know and that is why we are unable to do things. ‘Ignorance’ in today’s world is a ‘sin’. There is so much we need to know; besides, very often we are full of ‘half-baked’ facts or heavy with misinformation.

My suggestion is that within the congregation a ‘think-tank’ is constituted, that can feed every house/institution with relevant information and documentation. I would go further in emphasizing that together with our house/community libraries, we develop a mini documentation centre where important articles are kept. With the domination of cyber-space, much information can be downloaded from websites. Gathering of information is one small part of the exercise; using it effectively and regularly is our prime responsibility.

ii. To be a Communicating One

We live in a world which is overwhelmed by mass-media. There is so much communication all around us that we fall into the trap of not being communicative enough. I am not merely talking about communicating with one another in our own communities (that is perhaps stating the obvious) but I am talking about our ability to put our studies, our research, our thoughts to a wider audience.

How effectively are we using the media? I am aware of your communication centre in Indore (Satprakashan, Satprachar Press, etc.) and other centres…all our efforts are in reality a drop in the ocean. We really do not have sufficient journalists who have been trained for the print and electronic media. These obviously do not have to be only religious; but how about ensuring that there are more and more ‘right-minded people’ who enter the field of social communications.

Our presence in the vernacular media is negligible. Many of us have ‘our faithful’ as victims to our Sunday homilies. More often than not, these sermons tend to be far removed from the reality of daily life. We dare not venture into the realm of confronting ‘fundamentalism’ because some of us believe that that is politics. We would rather have our parishioners remain docile and unquestioning for the simple reason that we are unable to perceive the challenges all around us. We also fight shy of the media and in spite of being trained in perception management and public relations, we have really not given it the importance it deserves. We falsely equate ‘lack of public relations’ with ‘humility’.

iii. To Make Common Cause

As religious, as priests, as Christians we have for too long remained isolated from the rest of society. As long as we are not touched, we are comfortable in our own ghettos and in our own Church-compounds. Yes we do come out when our interests are at stake. Is this not a type of fundamentalism too? Do we make common cause with other men and women of goodwill? Do we see the importance of net-working and collaboration with others around us”? Can we keep our facilities, our institutions open to such groups and individuals for their meetings, programmes, etc.? On the other hand, can we join in initiatives and endeavours organized by them? There are so many excellent groups and individuals all over the country. It is important that we join some of them and involve ourselves as much as possible in the issues taken up by them.

iv. To be Rooted in Culture and Dialogue

The contribution of the SVDs to the country in the field of social and cultural anthropology is immense. You have definitely been pioneers in this field. At the same time, culture has to be dialogical. We need to express ‘our culture’ in a sensitive manner; respecting the cultures, traditions and practices of those around us. Our efforts should be oriented towards areas that bind rather than divide. Above all, we need to dialogue with all men and women. Our response to fundamentalism should neither be sectarian nor communal.

Dialogue presumes that we make ourselves vulnerable, that we are willing to look into ourselves…it means, going out to others, reaching out to them, being transparent enough to learn from them. Exposing ourselves to diverse cultures, religions and other backgrounds and sharing with them the wealth we have, will hopefully help in creating that space that we need to address fundamentalism.

v. To be Active and Public

We may possess plenty of knowledge and be full of good intentions but if this is not translated into concrete action, it would be meaningless. The Bible says: “Not all who say Lord, Lord…”. Our response has to be dynamic. Very often we are piece-meal and ad hoc in our approach. We tend to respond to a part rather than to the whole.

Consistency in action means that we need to participate in dharnas, morchas, protests. For Mahatma Gandhi, ‘satyagraha’ was a key factor in his triumph over the forces of evil. We should not allow ‘the culture of silence’ to be preeminent in our lives and in our institutions. For too long, as Church, as Religious Congregations, we have remained uninvolved; perhaps worried about our own image and for fear of our foreign funding being stopped.

I feel extremely proud to share with you that in the wake of the Gujarat carnage, the Jesuits of Gujarat took a very public stand to fight the fascist and divisive forces that are at work in the State. By doing so, we have risked everything. The results of the elections were definitely not to our expectations. Only time will tell whether our standing up for truth and justice will pay dividends for the people whom we have been called to serve; yes, we have been called to take an active part against what is happening and to make public our stand.

vi. To Form Men and Women for Others

Our priestly and religious formation will play an important role in the way we formulate our response in the years to come. Are we truly forming our young men and women, who enter our seminaries and religious congregations to respond to the signs of the times? Are they challenged enough? Are they exposed enough to be able to dialogue and debate, to write and to articulate to be involved in the serious issues which confront us all the time?

Besides, we also run schools and other institutions and have been entrusted with the task of forming citizens for this country. We need to reflect and question our own systems and see whether these institutions of learning are able to provide that transforming experience to each of those who enter their portals. Above all, we have to teach our students the need and importance of taking a stand. Are we inculcating in them a value system or are we churning out ‘excellent students’ who prefer to opt out of the country? Do we have the courage to turn our educational institution into power houses which will help build an India which is tolerant, secular, honest, creative and progressive, providing space for everyone irrespective of their religious beliefs?

vii. To be Grounded in Spirituality

Our response ultimately must be grounded in a spirituality which is not merely contemporary, but which has for its essence the inseparable dimensions of faith and justice.

These are ominous times…These are times when India is at the crossroads. The happenings of the past year in Gujarat and in several other parts of India should shake us out of our complacency. This seminar, given its very focused theme, is a pointer in the right direction. I suppose, our point of departure is not the awareness generated or the nice words which are being communicated but whether encounters like these can provide us with the necessary stimuli to rethink strategies, to redefine our priorities and to recreate positive action in the face of the onslaught by fundamentalist and fascist forces. The question we need to ask ourselves is not whether we should get involved but how quickly and how deeply we should!