Victims of the media's terror investigation
Investigators are yet to identify the real perpetrators of the
Delhi High Court blasts but the media have revealed almost everything including
the entire game plan and identities. ABHISHEK UPADHYAY
asks at what stage of an investigation should the media begin to mention names.
 |
| Photo courtesy: The Hindu |
Now the National Investigation Agency
has taken over investigation
of the first Delhi High Court Blast case which took place on May 25, 2011 and a
case was registered by the agency under sections of Explosives Substances Act
and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act on December 20. The NIA has been
entrusted with the investigation of this case after Delhi Police failed to make
any concrete progress.
It is important to note here that the
Ministry of Home Affairs has already acknowledged in the Lok Sabha
during the last session (on September 6, 2011) that no pointer/fact suggesting
terrorist involvement was found in this very case. So, when NIA has taken over
the additional responsibility of probing the first Delhi High Court Blast case
of 2011, it is pertinent to look back at the fate of the deadlier second
high court blast (September 7, 2011) case which claimed 15 lives and
which was handed over to NIA the very next day. The media has already
done a good share of its typical terror investigation in this case and
continues to do so with an amazing level of impunity in close coordination with
the NIA.
Investigators are yet to identify the
real perpetrators of this terror design, though 100 days of blast have passed,
but the media has revealed almost everything including the entire game plan and
identities. Media calculations, based on terror briefs by investigators, have
taken its toll too. Shariq Bhatt, a minor student of
Kistwar (Jammu Kashmir), became the first victim of this invisible, enigmatic
investigation and somewhat ultra-religious nature of media reporting.
Shariq, a minor of 15 years and a class
XI student of Islamia Faridia Higher Secondary School in Kishtwar, was painted
as a hardcore terrorist by the media before they realised the hollowness of
unofficial terror briefings. His story is a grim example of the terror
unleashed by the media’s self appointed terror investigators, particularly in
this case, but it is not the sole instance of the future which awaits any
terror suspects per se. As per the latest update of the case, three youths, all
from Kishtwar, are in custody and efforts being made to establish their link
with Bangladesh and Pakistan-based hardcore terrorist organisation HUJI or
Harkat-ul-Jehadi-Islami and a conglomerate of various terror organisations.
In a nutshell, the arithmetic as of now
is like this. Three arrests--all youths--one minor (medical reports establish
the alleged accused Abid Hussain as a minor and he was sent to the juvenile
justice board), no information about who made the bomb, no information
about who planted it, and a huge gap in information on who facilitated
it, but the show goes on.
On December 13, Minister of State for
Home Affairs, Jitendra Singh, in reply to an unstarred question of the Congress
MP Manish Tewari in Parliament, had to acknowledge in writing that Delhi High
Court Blast case of September 7, 2011, had not been solved and continues to be
investigated by NIA which had reported arrest of three persons (all residents of
Kistwar, Jammu and Kashmir). But, surprisingly, the media had already solved it
with regular specifics provided by NIA. On November 1, the Indian Express
reported with the headline—“Delhi blast: NIA finishes blast jigsaw, except
for the bombers.” It had point-wise exact details about the whole scheme of the
blast and the faces behind it.
This had very interesting claims about
Wasim Akram Malik, the third arrested accused who was pursuing his MBBS from
Jalalabad Ragib-Rubeya Medical College and Hospital in Sylhet, Bangladesh. The
same Express story claimed –“According to sources, Malik has told
interrogators that he regrets having committed two mistakes: organising to send
out the email claiming responsibility from his hometown Kishtwar, and meeting
Aamir Abbas, another accused (who was contacted in connection with the email)
in person.”
The Indian Express in its story of
November 1, gave the entire blueprint of this terror operation, all according
to sources, and at the same time raised doubts over the story though it did not
explain as to why it carried a story entirely based on sources which it did not
believe in in the first place. When you file a story as per sources, it means
you believe in your sources, then why raise a doubt and, if it is doubtful, why
publish it?
Here again the same style of terror
investigation, reporting news based on a mere confession (which was later
denied), discreetly provided by the agency with no actual or circumstantial
evidences in place. This is also a fact that Wasim Akram Malik has denied his
confession in court. He claimed before the judge that he had been tortured
in custody and had “no knowledge” about Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru
until the National Investigation Agency told him during questioning. Waseem
even corrected in court that he was an MBBS student and not a student of Unani
medicine as claimed in media reports.
This is the crux of the so-called media terror investigation which necessitates
visiting the beginning of this episode. Again the tale of this investigation
unfolds from Kistwar. Revelations started tumbling out about this blast, as the
NIA, the official investigator in this case, happened to crack some leads and
swooped down on the sleepy, nondescript Kashmiri town of Kishtwar. They
arrested three persons with the help of JK police, two of whom, were minors,
studying in their secondary classes with no criminal backgrounds. The NIA was
following the traces of terror email, sent after the blast, from a cyber cafe
in Kishtwar with the address harkat-uljihadi2011@gmail.com.
As Investigators zeroed in, the media reported their every move simultaneously.
Seven days after the blast, two boys from Kishtwar were arrested on September 4
and slapped with rigorous charges of criminal conspiracy. They were accused of
sending the terror email, and owning responsibility for the Delhi High Court
blast. The media immediately jumped into action. Headlines appeared in print as
well as in electronic media with due credit to official sources. As per reports
that appeared in the media, two Kistwar residents, Abid Hussain and Shariq
Bhatt had been booked under Section 120(B) IPC (criminal conspiracy) as first
arrests in the email episode. It was a big scoop and was carried with all
possible details about their identity as a sort of proven crime without even a
modicum of sensitivity.
Very soon, both of these minor accused
were known figures across the country, thanks to the peculiar style of “terror”
journalism, thoroughly based on NIA or JK police’s brief. Nobody bothered to
delve deep in order to dig out the truth behind the scene. It seemed that the
information cake had already been prepared and discreetly served to the media
with some sprinkles of gossip as topping. A huge damage had been done, where
the fourth pillar of the democracy was in the role of an active partner in this
jamboree of much-hyped terror investigation.
On September 17, 2011, the media
explained that three accused had been arrested by the NIA, named Amir
Abbas Dev, Abid Hussain and Shariq Bhatt of whom Abid and Shariq sent
terror mail, claiming responsibility for the terror blast on behalf of Harkat
ul Jihad ul Islami or HUJI. NIA first caught these two (Abid and Shariq) and
their interrogation led to the arrest of the third one,
Amir Abbas Dev. As soon as Amir Abbas was arrested, another theory flashed in
media quoting same reliable NIA sources that it was
Abbas who had handed over the draft of the e-mail to Abid Hussain and he was
the real mastermind.
But the most intriguing as well as
dramatic turn of this investigation was yet to come up. This came in the form
of a U turn, taken by NIA when it released Shariq Bhatt, one of the three
accused, arrested on the pretext of conspiring to spread terror. He was
detained on September 10 and later remanded to investigative agency custody,
which legally meant that he was arrested by NIA. When Shariq was released,
the media surprisingly reported praises from NIA officials, quoting an
anonymous investigator: “We wish him good luck for the forthcoming exams.” One
newspaper gave a headline —“Kishtwar boy
released, SSP tells father ‘your child is brilliant.”’ Shariq was a class 11
student and his exams were approaching at the time of his arrest. Nobody at
this stage tried to pause for a moment and think what they had done with an
innocent student in the name of terror investigation and in the hurry of
claiming informative scoops. They didn’t even bother to undo the mistake.
As per court guidelines, the media
cannot disclose the identity of a minor accused however grave or light the
nature of the crime allegedly committed by him. But in case of Shariq, all
norms were demolished only in the pursuit of blindly following NIA leads. No
newspaper or channel issued an apology.
Even Abid Hussain who is in the custody
of juvenile justice board, has been prominently mentioned in news reports with relevant
particulars about him. As if Shariq’s case had no bearing on media
consciousness, it started copying again the unconfirmed upcoming revelations
being put forth by the investigator, without any substantial proofs in their
support. Now a new theory cropped up in some respectable national dailies
linking the network of these jehadis form Kashmir to Kerala.
Now, a Malayalam-speaking jihadist,
Abdul Jabbar, was the focal point of headlines. Referring to the arrest of Amir
Abbas Dev and Abid Hussain, media announced: “Interrogation by NIA has thrown
up evidences that recent Delhi High Court, as well as a string of other recent
strikes, could have been facilitated by a jihadist unit in Jammu and Kashmir.”
NIA sources then contributed to anothertheory which encircled
another fundamentalist organisation called Tablighi Jammat, supposed to have
massive regional presence, allegedly dedicating its resources in spreading an
ultra-conservative version of Islam. Some anonymous agency sources claimed that
the cell behind attack on the Delhi High Court was recruited by this very
Jammat which has been a launch-pad for several jihadist groups and several of
its adherents have been implicated in terrorist operations.
There was one more speculation that the
rank and file of this Jamat have allegedly played a major role in setting up
the Indian Mujahideen, the jihadist group held responsible for several terror
attack across India. It was proved again how investigation agency supplies
rations to the media and how the latter lap them up.
As per the Parliamentary reply on August 16, 2011,
by Minister of State for Home Jitendra Singh on an unstarred question by MP
Prahlad Venkatesh Joshi, NIA had registered and investigated seven cases from
Kerala in which SIMI, LET were involved and in six cases charge sheet has been
filed. NIA appeared to be easily connecting one case with another, thereby
building a chain, and the media readily believed this theory. Thus seven cases
related with a different terrorist organisation, seemed to be good enough for
the NIA to point the needle towards Kerala after linking it with international
terror organisations, though NIA has not pointed anything officially.
The media was yet to do full autopsy of
this very Tableegi Jamat in connection with Delhi High Court blast, when Wasim
Akram Malik was arrested by the NIA. As the agency held him the main
conspirator/mastermind of the blast, the media again took a 360-degree turn and
an intense investigative journalism was launched to hunt for the details around
Wasim’s past, present, and future, again with the lead from some anonymous NIA
investigators.
Thus, as per the new theory propagated
by these “reliable sources”, Wasim Akram and his absconding brother
Junaid Akram were the new terror characters intelligently fitted into
investigative leads published and shown in the media. There were contradicting
reports regarding the arrest of Wasim Akram Malik who was a medical student in
Bangladesh. Two theories emerged leading to his arrest. As per the first, he
was held in Bangladesh and later handed over to Indian authorities, while his
family claimed that he came to India at their own call. They fully cooperated
with the NIA and asked Wasim to come back to answer NIA’s questions.
Adding a twist to Wasim’s arrest, his
father Reyaz-ul-Hasan Malik, an employee of National Hydro Power Corporation,
claimed that he thad ransferred the required money into the bank account of
Wasim to enable him to book his flight for Delhi. He termed it an act of
vengeance by Hizb conduit Azhar Ali, whose family was his tenant in
Kishtwar. He told the media that his elder son Wasim, who has been
studying in Bangladesh since 2006, had come home after 17 months on August 31,
2011. After spending some days with the family, he had left for Dhaka but spent
three days in Jammu with his friends and relatives.
He gave some exact details: On
September 6, Wasim withdrew money from ATM, on September 7, he was challaned by
Jammu Traffic Police for driving without helmet and on September 8, he again
withdrew money for making some purchase as he had to leave for Dhaka on
September 9, and challenged NIA to verify these facts. Unfortunately no one in
the media bothered to verify these claims or question NIA on this count.
Media published these bits of
information under the heading: “Delhi blast: NIA team in Bangladesh quiz
students”, where the first five paragraph of the story were devoted to
investigative moves of NIA and arguments given by Wasim’s father in his defence
were carried in the latter part of the story. As of now,
Wasim Akram Malik is seeking permission from Delhi trial court to visit
Bangladesh to take his MBBS exams. The letter submitted by Waseem’s family
before the court is part of the application in which his counsel has sought the
court’s direction to preserve the record of his mobile number and the CCTV of
the airport.
The Indian legal system still believes
in the phrase innocent until proven guilty, which was coined by the English
lawyer Sir William Garrow. There was a well thought out reasoning in Garrow’s
observation. He insisted that the accusers should be robustly tested in court
and an objective observer in the position of the juror must reasonably conclude
that the defendant almost certainly committed the crime.
But the media seem to be unmoved by
such legal or ethical connotations and continue pursuing their
so-called investigation where information is simply passed on from unknown
authorities to the public, without demur. There is no way to prove at this
juncture, whether these accused are innocent or guilty. However, the way the
media have been reporting the investigation of this blast is really a tragedy
of journalism.
(The author is
Editor, Special Projects, Dainik Bhaskar Group)
Source: the hoot dot org
No comments:
Post a Comment