1984 anti-Sikh riots case: Sajjan Kumar’s conviction will set a precedent, says Arun Jaitley

Share

Tweet

Share

Share

Email

Comments

“It was justice delayed and a lot of people have even passed away waiting for justice,” Jaitley told CNN-News 18 in an exclusive interview.

After the Delhi High Court convicted Congress leader Sajjan Kumar in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, there’s a widespread feeling that justice has been delayed and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley firmly echoed that sentiment in an exclusive interview with CNN-News 18 after the verdict was made.

Q. On the day Congress forms govt in three states, the irony is that senior Congress leader Sajjan Kumar has been convicted. The verdict has come out after 34 years. Do you think justice delayed is justice denied?

Jaitley: Many who suffered have died and when justice is delayed, people definitely suffer. In this riot, politicians have been in the front, attacking one community and not even in one place in did police stop them or open fire. When riots take place, police intervenes but there was free hand given to rioters. After that, a cover-up exercise was initiated and there was Rajiv’s remark on big tree small tree when the Commission was formed. They said govt is not involved but they put constraints on civil liberties report and banned it. Whenever any committee was formed, it would wind up when it reached to any Congress leader. The judge who gave Commision report was made Rajya Sabha member after retirement. I feel there should be a closure in such cases so that victims feel justice has been delivered.

Q. Is this is a closure?

Jaitley: This is not closure but an important step because the person who has been punished today, he was somewhere like a symbol of the riots and therefore this is an important step. But thousands have died and somebody should be answerable.

Q: On Kamal Nath, don’t you think the protest against him is misplaced? 

Jaitley: There were two versions, victim’s version and accused version.  After 30 years,  such problems arise when witness die or you lose them. The Sikh community’s perception is that they have seen it. while Kamal Nath says he was there to save people.

Q: Do you think Congress should have taken some action?

Jaitley: It is their matter and i don’t think Congress has any regret on this. Rahul Gandhi, who tweets all the time, doesn’t even welcome the decision and no Congress leader spoke on verdict. It proves that they don’t have any regrets.

Q: Do you think the case against Jagdish Tytler will be expedited?

Jaitley: I feel all the cases, especially now that has been reopened by SIT, should be expedited.

Q: Is there any timeline?

Jaitley: I think day-to-day trial already has been declared by SC. Those guilty should be punished.

Q: Parallels have been drawn between 2002 and 1984?

Jaitley: The riots in 2002 were unfortunate but many died in police firing also. There was case against everyone. SC made an independent SIT and many were convicted. In the 1984 riots, there was no police action, no SIT was formed  and there was no proper investigation.

Q: How do you view the verdict?

Jaitley: There is fairness in our society. and there was anger in Sikh community. They felt that such big injustice happened and no action was taken. I feel such verdicts will reduce the feeling of injustice.

Q: Do you think there is a need for debate over 1984 riots in Parliament?

Jaitley: We need to think about all the wrong that has been done by Congress during that time and later over cover-up . If debate happens, everything will come out in front of the Assembly.

Q: On the furore surrounding the Rafale deal, the SC verdict has raised more questions than answers, particularly about the issues of SC .The lawyers are saying the verdict should be recalled even if there is misinterpretation, or misrepresentation.

Jaitley: There are hundreds of judgement that are very long judgement and on a given page some ambiguity can arise. It is a settled practice that you go to court and mention it and they correct that ambiguity. Here the govt has made a correct representation to court about one fact – what is the stage of CAG, is it pending before court or is it pending before PAC. The government has already moved a clarification on the ambiguity part. In any case principle issues were need for weapon and the court said yes. They said the process has been fair and the offset choice, (which was Rahul Gandhi’s main issue) the court has said it has to be done with Dassault and the government has nothing to do with the pricing as it has been given in sealed cover. The court has said our price is commercially a better deal

In each of the issues, at what stage is CAG report pending? Has the report been given or is still being considered is only incidental narration of facts . It doesn’t go to the core of the issues involved.

Q: Then in that case, as Congress demands to go for JPC, you have nothing to hide?

Jaitley: JPC can be on policy issue. A politically partisan body that is divided on political lines can never do a investigative function. In fact, way back in the beginning of last century in the Westminister, this issue used to arise. Can you have an investigation by a parliamentary committee? Some of the best experts in world used to say you should never have a JPC. Investigations should be done by either courts or investigative bodies or by judicial tribunals.

Q: So will you say Congress is attempting to make Bofors out of it?

Jaitley: Congress wanted an immoral equivalance but if you see the case, there are no kickbacks, no Swiss bank accounts and no Quattrocchi. The Congress and Rahul lied. They said procedures were not followed, CCA  approval was not taken, Air Force not consulted, etc. Everything was a figment of imagination and every procedure was followed.

Q: On the Rafale deal, you have said Congress is a bad loser. So, is CAG’s view not relevant?

Jaitley: I have said CAG’s view is not relevant on the three-four questions involved in SC… that will separately follow whatever the CAG says. As far as Congress is concerned, they lied that the verdict had little ambiguity. The government never misled the court. There is some ambiguity and it will be corrected through judicial process.

Q: Will you be challenging Congress for a debate on this in Parliament?

Jaitley: Well, we wanted a debate today and I said so in writing yesterday. We are willing to go for a debate on Rafale, 1984 and on any other issue including, RBI.