QUESTION:

In an interview to the India TV in June 2017, the BJP Chief Minister of UP infamously said, “Agar apradh karenge toh thok diye jayenge (if they commit crime, we’ll take them out).” In UP alone 103 criminals were killed and 1859 injured in 5178 police engagements in the last more than 2 years. Encounter killings of criminals have become normal and people are applauding it. Is there scepticism about the very law and order system of our country as such by the rulers and the people? What are the consequences?

Fr. Vijai Alphonse

ANSWER:

The term Encounter Killing is a euphemism used by all law-enforcing authorities in India to describe extrajudicial killings of alleged gangsters or terrorists or those whose political ideology is seen as a threat to the ruling dispensation or even innocent people whose identities are mistaken or are made scapegoats. Since the 1990s it has become very frequent in many Indian states. Those organizations who champion the cause of human rights raise their voice against the extrajudicial brutal actions of the law-enforcing authorities who flout the law to eliminate those who are real criminals or even suspects. The encounter like the notorious killing of Vikas Dubey in the first week of July 2020 is the latest of many such police encounters. Dubey was the main accused in the killing of 8 policemen who came to arrest him. Five of his associates were also killed by the Uttar Pradesh police in various encounters. It was reported on the previous day of the Republic Day of 2019 that the Government of UP would claim as one of the achievements of the UP Government; 3000 encounters and 78 killings!

The police who staged an encounter drama to eliminate the gangster Dubey might have been following the stated policy of the Chief Minister of UP that the criminals would be ‘eliminated’ in encounters. It is reported that every day an average of 5 custodial death are happening in India. The latest among them were the victims of police torture, J. Jayaraj and his son Bennix of Thoothukudy, who eventually succumbed to the police atrocities on them. Any so-called police “encounter” is scuttling of the legal process and thereby creating apathy and eventual loss of faith in the legal and judicial system by the citizens of this country.

The Rule of Law

In his drama on Thomas More A Man for All Seasons, Robert Bolt presents a dialogue between Thomas More and his son-in-law William Roper: “William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!” Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?” William Roper: “Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!” Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ‘round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”

For Thomas More who was martyred for his convictions, morality was superior to law. But law was morality though morality is above law. Therefore his demand was to make law as moral as possible. But once that law is made according to the principles of morality and according to the highest state of the human knowledge about the nature of humans as humans available at the time of making of the laws, then whatever the laws are, obedience to law is morality. In one of the dialogues between More, then the Lord Chancellor, with his family members who are urging him to arrest Richard Rich his daughter, Margaret, says, “Father, that man’s bad.” More answers, “There is no law against that.” His son-in-law, Roper: “There is! God’s law!” More: “Then God can arrest him …. The law, Roper, the law. I know what’s legal not what’s right. And I’ll stick to what’s legal . . . . I’m not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can’t navigate. I’m no voyager. But in the thickets of the law, oh, there I’m a forester.” We may ask why was Thomas More obedient to legitimate authority and law even when he knew that they were immoral. We may assume that it was his fear of the alternative to law. However, response to an immoral law from any authority legitimate or illegitimate is civil disobedience according to More.

When the rule of law is thrown to the winds by the political authorities who are the guardians of law and those to whom they entrust the control of law-order with power appropriate to their offices and when they have only scant regard for law or flout the law for their convenience they unleash the terror of lawlessness and human inhumanity to humans. Founded on the Constitution of India, the laws of our country are to safeguard the inalienable rights of every Indian citizen and they hold that every citizen is equal before law. However, in the history of independent India and especially in the recent past both the central and state governments and the law enforcing agencies appear to disregard the law of the land in dealing with law and order situations of the country.

All those who oppose the undemocratic and unprincipled and anti-poor, anti-minorities, anti-dalits policies of the government, mainly, social activists, writers and other intellectuals are arrested and put in prison labelling them as urban Naxalites, Maoists, anti-nationals etc. Criminals win elections and sit in the parliament and state assemblies as law-makers and from their position of holding political power they control and manipulate police and other law-enforcing agencies for their advantage at the cost of the lives of many innocent citizens. When the laws of the land are disregarded and cruelty is unleashed on the weak and the vulnerable, when money and power are used to exploit, discriminate and eliminate those people who are perceived as a threat to the ruling dispensation, when the institutions that are the pillars of democracy are devalued or made hollow, when unethical or immoral means are adopted and when even religion is manipulated to secure power, sublime laws that are there to safeguard the lives and property and promote the harmonious societal life of ordinary citizens lose their purpose. Both lawlessness and manipulation of laws condemn the citizens of a country to slavery and misery!

Doing Adharma for the sake of Dharma

It is a perverted religious and socio-political ideology that any means can be used if the purpose is good. It is the policy of “the end justifies the means.” The present day Hindutva ideologists have no qualms about adopting this perverted philosophy. They hold that any Adharma can be done if the motivation of doing that Adharma is to establish Dharma. All those who belong to the Sangh Parivar find justification for any adharmic action of eliminating those whom they consider the enemies of their ideology or their government. They do so by interpreting certain instances in the sacred books like Mahabharata and Ramayana and other Puranas employing deceptions, cheatings, and lies for achieving good ends. They cite various instances of deceptions used in the battle between the Kauravas and the Pandavas as narrated in the epic Mahabharata. It is believed that even some incarnations of god Vishnu is to destroy the wicked and to establish dharma. When one holds on to those perverted interpretations of the religious texts to justify any unlawful action against both the guilty and the innocent people in the name of bringing righteousness and order in the society, it is paving the way for anarchy and lawlessness.
We find certain instances of such perversion of justice even in the Old Testament. The extermination of peoples and tribes in the name of God as if God wanted them to be eliminated from the face of the earth was the justification offered by some Old Testament authors. However, this is not the experience of God throughout salvation history. God of the Old Testament is a just God who stands on the side of the poor and the oppressed and condemns those who do injustice. All the prophets especially Amos and Micah consistently proclaim a God of justice. Jesus corrects any perverted view of the Old Testament. For Jesus, both the end and the means must be right and just. As a part of the Sermon on the Mount Jesus would affirm that humans are called to abandon the law of the jungle and go beyond it to live as authentic humans in love and peace. “You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if anyone would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you. “You have heard that it was said, You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy.” But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:38-44). Mahatma Gandhi was inspired by the spirit of the Sermon on the Mount in advocating non-violence (ahimsa) and Satyagraha as a means of achieving freedom from the colonial rule of the British. Till his last breath, he followed the philosophy that both the end and the means must be just and non-violent.

The terrorists who claim to belong to Islam use violent means to establish the rule of Allah and an ideal Islamic society all over the world. In the recent past alone in the Middle East, thousands of innocent people were butchered, their homes and cities plundered in the name of God and religion. They trample underfoot the basic universal laws that are foundational for a civil society to survive to establish a society governed by God’s laws according to their belief. For them too the end justifies the means. The ungodly and immoral policy of the fascists and dictators of all times was that the end justified the means and so they sacrificed thousands of human beings on the altars of their tyrannical power. Those dictators like Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini killed millions and millions of people claiming that they were bringing a new order in the society to make it better, happier and comfortable. The dictators determine what is best for the people of the country. They have no regard for those universally accepted rules and norms of human behaviour and interaction.

Low Credibility Quotient of Law-Enforcing Authorities

The fake encounter killing and any killing of the criminals and others by the police forces without the due process of law have become normal in India since a few years. Some encounter-killing specialists are honoured by the police department and civil authorities. In spite of the affidavit in the Supreme Court stating that the police in self-defence shot dead the gangster Vikas Dubey who had 60 criminal cases against him and killed 8 policemen, the general public would not buy this police version of his elimination. The public perception of this killing of a criminal is according to the proclaimed policy of the Chief Minister to eliminate those who indulge in criminal activities. It is obvious that it is not according to the due process of law. But then, for them, the end justifies the means!

The ordinary citizens know from their own experiences and the news about the experience of others how the police personnel treat a person accused of petty or serious crime. If the accused or the victims of crimes belong to the Dalit groups, minority religions or to the poor classes of the society generally they experience discrimination and would be further harassed by the police force. The torture of the innocent father and son duo of Thoothukudy in Tamil Nadu by the police officers causing the eventual tragic death of the victims can only be attributed to the criminal mind-set of some of the police and their bias against the dominated castes and subaltern people. Though there are some honest and duty conscious police officers, a large majority of them have no credibility before the public because of their corrupt practices and abuse of power. They can be bought by the rich, threatened and forced to follow the illegal demands of their political masters. Some of them are perverts who enjoy torturing their fellow-human beings.

The complicity of the police and other law-enforcing authorities during and after the riots in North-Eastern Delhi, especially on 23 February 2020 is detailed in the “Report of the Fact-Finding Committee on the North-East Delhi Riots of February 2020.” The report states that “violence started in different pockets almost immediately after the short speech of Shri Kapil Mishra on 23 February, 2020 at Maujpur in which he openly called for forcefully removing the protestors at Jafrabad in North East Delhi.” The legitimate and peaceful protest against CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) was inconvenient to the government and the ruling party. The report states further that “seemingly, to crush the protests, with support of the Administration and Police, a retaliatory plan of pro-CAA protesters was worked out to trigger violence at a large scale which led to the loss of lives and damage to hundreds of properties, owned mainly by the Muslim religious minority.” Such an explicit complicity of the police either by not arresting or not even mentioning in their FIRs about who incited people to riot and sometimes remaining as mute spectators of violence or not responding to the pleas of the victims to protect them etc. reveal on whose side the police and all-law enforcing authorities are. Thus a large majority of the citizens lose faith in those whom they consider the legitimate authorities to protect the lives and properties of law-abiding citizens whatever be their religion, caste, gender or political ideology.

Erosion of Popular Trust in Judiciary

The so called four pillars of democracy, namely, Legislature, Executive, Judiciary and Press are the legitimate institutions that can safeguard the lives of the citizens in a democratic republic. Unfortunately, all these institutions as institutions of democratic set up have lost their credibility in the last few decades and especially in recent times. The state and central legislatures have many known corrupt and criminal members, the executive have persons known for their corruption and with alleged criminal past, the judiciary has judges who are corrupt and the press has succumbed to the pressures of the government not to be critical of it but to be supportive. Certainly there are some honest politicians, ministers and judges and journalists. There are a few media houses that stand for truth and justice. But by and large, the credibility of all the institutions of democracy has eroded. They are being systematically destroyed by a dispensation with fascist ideology.

The courts of law including the Supreme Court considered to be the last bulwark of democracy have been losing their credibility by certain actions of omission and commission. The courts are accused of siding with the government of the day and with the police and not with the right of the citizens. Certainly, there are exceptions as there are judges who are true to their conscience and their responsibility as the guardians of the Constitution as it can be seen in the intervention of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in the case of the custodial killing of the father and the son by the police in Thoothukudy. The press conference held by four eminent supreme court judges in January 2018, for the first time in the history of independent India, revealed how the Supreme Court itself is losing its credibility. Justice Chelemeswar, one among the four, said, “Many things that are less than desirable happened in the last few months. Unless this institution [Supreme Court] is preserved and it maintains its equanimity, democracy will not survive in this country, or any country. The survival of a democracy, it is said, the hallmark of a good democracy, is an independent and impartial judge.” However, things have not changed much since this historical press conference.

Recently, after the Delhi riots of February, 2020, the noted civil rights activist Harsh Mandar, addressing the protestors of CAA said, “This fight can also not be won in the Supreme Court because, as we have seen in the case of the NRC, Ayodhya and Kashmir, the Supreme Court has not been able to protect humanity, equality and secularism. We will definitely try as hard as we can in the Supreme Court, because it is our Supreme Court after all. However, the final decision/verdict will be given neither by the parliament nor by the Supreme Court.” When he was advocating peaceful, non-violent protest to save the Constitutional rights in this speech a case was filed against him accusing him of “hate speech” while Kapil Mishra was left scot-free without any case registered against him even though by his hate speech he was instigating Delhi riots. One of the reasons for the mob to support the police in eliminating the criminals as it happened in Hyderabad is sign of their lack of trust in the courts and the legal process. It is a tragedy and death knell for a nation when its citizens lose faith in their legal system!
God’s Law

According to the Christian faith, God is a just God. God stands on the side of the poor and the oppressed. No one can take God’s place in deciding the fate of another human being. The question of God to Cain who killed his brother Abel was, “Where is Abel your brother?” (Gen 4:9). Abel was certainly innocent. But what about those Cains who kill, maim and bring all kinds of sufferings to people? They need to be brought before the law and be punished according to the law of the land. Prophet Ezekiel reveals God’s mind: “Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, says the Lord GOD, and not rather that he should turn from His way and live?” (Ezekiel 18:23). Scuttling the process of law and eliminating them according to the plan and pleasure of a ruler is not only usurping the power of God but also opening the flood gates of social self-destruction.

The corruption and the eventual destruction of democratic institutions erode the credibility of the justice system of a country. When the credibility of the institutions that support the edifice of the democratic system fails and the law of the land is not respected by the rulers of a country, then the citizens of a country can survive only by slavishly submitting to such cruel and inhuman powers. They become a nation of slaves! Only by resorting to non-violent and lawful means of protest can they regain their humanity at least for their next generation, if not for them!