Opinion The underdog is not always the wronged party

Reporting on human rights violations is an important part of journalism,but sometimes there is a lack of discrimination in the causes that we champion.

New DelhiJuly 29, 2009 02:56 PM IST First published on: Jul 29, 2009 at 02:56 PM IST

Reporting on human rights violations is an important part of journalism,but sometimes there is a lack of discrimination in the causes that we champion. I,for one,was skeptical from the start of the allegation that the shootout at Batla House in Delhi,last September,was a fake encounter. The National Human Rights Commission,after a full inquiry,has now come to exactly the same conclusion.

True,some policemen do have a bias against Muslims. And it is also a fact that at times the police stage false encounters to cover up their incompetence and grab glory. But the circumstances of the Batla House incident made such a scenario highly improbable. As an old hand at crime reporting,I am aware that when the police want to stage an encounter they certainly don’t do it in a small flat in a large building located in a densely populated,communally sensitive,neighbourhood. And,that too,during daytime. Nor does a much decorated police officer get bumped off by his own colleagues in such a shootout. The theory that some malevolent force in the police plotted a two-in-one encounter,in which a police rival and two innocent Muslims were both to be eliminated,is a bit far fetched.

So why did the Batla House fake encounter theory gain so much credibility? The local population has a history of antagonism towards the police and the municipal authorities,probably for good reason. So their reluctance to accept the authorities’ version is understandable. Politicians are always ready to fish in troubled waters for votes,particularly with an election around the corner. So one can understand,but not condone,Amar Singh,Lalu Prasad Yadav,Salman Khursheed,Sheila Dixit and Kapil Sibal demanded an inquiry to appease communal sentiment.

But probably the prime culprit in spreading misinformation is a section of the media,particularly the television. In the coverage of alleged human rights violations a certain type of naïve,eager beaver,young journalist believes it is fair game to publicise whatever the underdog claims,without any application of mind about the sustainability of the charges or objective analysis of the facts. The assumption is that the authorities are always at fault.

In this instance,the Delhi Police was cagey in the beginning about coming out with its version of events,which naturally aroused suspicion. But this was probably because the police were trying to cover up their own blunder,of another kind.

From what I gather,the Delhi Police,in a bid to steal the entire glory,had rushed to make arrests at Batla House without informing other security agencies,though the raids were actually meant to be a joint operation. (The Delhi Police got tip offs from both the Mumbai and Ahmedabad Police that suspects in the Delhi serial blasts were staying at Batla House.) In the hurry to take the credit,the Special Cell team jumped the gun and botched up the operation. The arresting party was taken by surprise when the suspects opened fire.

The officer leading the arrest team was shot dead,since he was not even wearing a bullet proof jacket. In the confusion,two of the suspects managed to escape. Two others in the building were shot dead. Later,the men arrested from the building made detailed confessions to the cops about the modus operandi in the Delhi serial blasts.

The mentality which assumes the underdog is always the wronged party was also at work in the Arushi murder,which occurred around the same time in Delhi. Here most of the media was quick to jump to the conclusion that a respected,prosperous dentist and his wife,known to be loving parents,had murdered their only daughter for no ostensible motive. The police cross-examination of the Nepali servants was portrayed as a bid to make scapegoats of helpless,unprotected migrant labour.

Such misdirected human rights champions are also behind the recent hue and cry raised over the Madhya Pradesh government’s alleged virginity tests on young,would-be brides. Outraged women’s rights activists have charged the state government with degrading and humiliating womanhood and displaying a chauvinistic mentality for insisting on virginity as a marriage criteria.

The fact is that the Madhya Pradesh government has set up a welfare scheme offering Rs 6,500 to poor tribal couples getting married. During an earlier distribution of grants it was discovered that one of the brides at the camp was about to give birth to a baby and some of the other couples applying for loans had been wed long back. The Shahdol district administration,anxious to make sure that couples did not misuse the marriage scheme,asked for a medical test. A not unreasonable request in the circumstances,one would have thought.