---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: S G Naravane
From: S G Naravane
Former Home Secretary GK Pillai's admission on Times Now - that an affidavit filed in the alleged "fake encounter" in Gujarat that killed four Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) terrorists, including Ishrat Jahan, was deliberately changed under political direction to omit mention of their LeT affiliation - has set the cat among the pigeons.
Since this allegation has more or less been admitted by P Chidambaram in an interview to NDTV, it shows the extent to which the Gandhi family saw Narendra Modi as a clear threat to its political domination even as early as 2009 (or even earlier), when the Congress party had just trounced the BJP in the general elections.Chidambaram told NDTV: "The original affidavit did say that A, B, C, D were terrorists, but the IB's position was we don't name or charge anyone as terrorists... therefore a second affidavit had to be filed to clarify (that)," and that he "owned the decision" to file the second affidavit. (Read here).
What is shocking is not merely that the affidavit was changed, but it was changed in a way that made threats to national security secondary to the political interests of the Gandhi dynasty, Sonia and Rahul.
The change in the affidavit was wrong in principle for two reasons, even though it is fair to claim that details about the affiliation of those killed by the Gujarat police were not as important as the charge that they were killed in a "fake encounter".
First, who is being killed is not immaterial to how the fake encounter case is finally decided – especially if it leads to conviction. As an analogy, let's assume a woman is being prosecuted for the murder of her husband. Is it immaterial to let the court know that she was beaten daily and that may be the cause that led to her murdering her husband, assuming it is all provable? Similarly, in a "fake encounter", who was killed is not an insignificant fact. The court can show leniency even if there is a conviction if it was clear that the persons killed were threats to national security.
Second, if Pillai is to be believed, there seems to have been wilful suppression of important national security aspects of the operation, Till the affidavit was changed, the Ishrat-LeT case was considered a successful Intelligence Bureau (IB) operation to lure and trap LeT terrorists, but this success was sacrificed and converted to criminality for political expediency, leading the UPA to finally target even the IB officer involved in the operation as an accused. If the country's intelligence resources are to be compromised so casually for political purposes, the Gandhi family – or the persons acting in their interest – can indirectly be accused of sacrificing national interest in the pursuit of their political enemies.
In fact, that is really the point of this article. That the Gandhi-led UPA put an enormous amount of state and party resources to ensure that one man – Narendra Modi – was nailed and prevented from posing a challenge to the family's political dominance, and the Ishrat Jahan affidavit change was only the most diabolical of those moves.
That various non-governmental organisations, the courts and even individual journalists helped in this endeavour shows how the eco-system created by the Congress-Left political forces acts to support the dynasty's interests.