A one-sided debate held on 9 February 2022, hosted by a Labour MP at the Westminster Hall on the “20th anniversary of the 2002 Gujarat riots” saw. Neither the groups representing the British Indian community nor the Indian High Commission. Invited or informed. Curiously, since we understand religion was raised, neither were any Hindu organisations informed or invited. Neither were Hindu survivors invited from what we understand.
Ahead of the anniversary of the Godhra riots (27 February), Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who is lawmaker Jo Cox’s sister (Jo was murdered in the year 2016) demanded that any unpublished report by Britain into the Gujarat riots must be made public.
Leadbeater believes that her British Muslim constituents who suffered the loss of family in the 2002 riots have not received justice yet, because their remains have not been returned to the UK. According to her, these bereaved families wanted a British coroner to conduct an inquest for any document or report about the riots that may be unpublished so far. Leadbeater expressed that the UK must condemn religious discrimination and uphold all freedoms and rights guaranteed in its constitution.
Those who were a part of the debate included: Kim Leadbeater MP, Bately and Spen (Labour), Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi MP - Slough (Labour), Imran Dawood a survivor of the riots, Barry Gardiner - Brent North (Labour), Theresa Villiers, Chipping Barnet (Conservative) and the Minister of State for Asia, Amanda Milling.
High Commission of India in London reacts
In an official statement the High Commission of India, London said they have not been approached so far by the MP who sponsored the motion or any other participants in 9th February’s discussion to engage on the subject - including on the specific request of the families of three British victims.
The statement by High Commission categorically hits back at Leadbeater’s assumption of any unpublished document being held back in the UK about the riots. It said: “Report of the Special Investigation Team constituted by the Supreme Court of India has been placed in the public domain in its entirety.
“India is not only the world’s largest functioning democracy, it also uniquely exemplifies unity in diversity. Our internal laws and foreign policy are guided by the principles enshrined in the Constitution of India and this enables our people to address their problems democratically and within our own democratic institutions including our legislature and judiciary.”
Why the debate may be an attempt to gaslight communal violence
Last year, India’s Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu said, "There is a trend in Western media to run down the Indian government on issues of secularism, free speech. They cannot digest the fact that India is on the rise. Some of them suffering from indigestion...India is the most secular country in the world.
"There are instances of individuals here and there... but as a whole, we practice secularism because it's in the blood, nerves and veins of Indians not because of this government or that government...Respecting all religions is our age-old practice," he added.
"The functioning of democracy in the country conforms to the constitutional principles of ensuring equal rights and justice for all citizens," he added.
It is important to note that while having debates and free speech as well as critiquing a country’s governance is a democratic right, assuming that a country is unsecular based on what happened 20 years ago is an act of haste, especially when majority participants do not understand the ethos of the largest democracy of the world.
When we consider India which by 2050 is projected to have the largest Muslim population of any country, with numerous Muslims having reached the Post of the Presidency, it is a beacon to the UK, where Northern Ireland with 0.1% of India’s population has had its Government suspended due to religious division with differing national interests.
What happened at the debate?
Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi MP from Slough said, “It is crucial that we acknowledge the importance of respect for all religions and the importance of living peacefully side by side. Does she (Leadbeater) also agree that it is imperative that the victims finally receive justice from the authorities?”
Survivor’s account
Leadbeater narrated the story of a survivor of the riots who present at the debate. She said, “On 28 February 2002, four tourists were on their way back from visiting the Taj Mahal. It should have been the trip of a lifetime. Their names were Sakil and Saeed Dawood, their 18-year-old nephew Imran, and their childhood friend Mohammed Aswat. Not long after they crossed the state border into Gujarat, their Jeep was stopped at a roadblock. A mob encircled the vehicle, demanding to know their religion. They replied that they were Muslim and that they were British citizens on holiday. In the violence that followed, Sakil, Saeed, Mohammed and their driver were all killed. Miraculously, although Imran Dawood was left for dead, he survived and is with us today. It is only through his testimony that we know the circumstances of what happened. He remembers Saeed and Sakil pleading for their lives to be spared. It is his fight for justice that brought the international campaign for proper recognition of what happened to my constituency of Batley and Spen.”
On behalf of Imran Dawood, Leadbeater demanded that Amanda Milling, Minister of State for Asia, must investigate with the Indian authorities whether the repatriation of the remains is possible and if so, it should happen as soon as practicable.
Minister of State for Asia says, no such unpublished report exists
However, Amanda Milling, the Minister of State for Asia has gone on record to say that no unpublished report exists in the UK, also adding that the former Indian PM, Late. Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government had condemned the violence.
Amanda Milling said, “We have provided consular support to the families of the British victims since 2002, and we will continue to provide assistance as needed. I acknowledge the hurt the families must feel that the remains of their loved ones have not been returned to them. We have been advised by the family’s legal representatives that an application has to be made to the court in India for the remains to be returned, and we stand ready to support that application once it has been made.
“Regarding the coroner’s inquest, we stand ready to engage and provide further consular assistance to the Dawood family if requested. We are not aware of any unpublished reports into the riots carried out by the UK Government at the time. During the riots, many women were raped, and Muslim homes and businesses were destroyed. According to official figures, the violence claimed more than 1,000 lives, although many reports suggest that the true figure is higher. The then Prime Minister, Prime Minister Vajpayee, and the Government of India strongly condemned the violence in the months that followed.
“We have a strong relationship with India. We raise the importance of freedom of religion and belief in India, including the impact of legislative and judicial measures, directly with the Indian authorities at appropriate times.
“UK Ministers and diplomats also maintain a dialogue with a range of Indian faith leaders and communities across India. Through our high commission in New Delhi, we support a UK-India interfaith leadership programme, which brings together emerging Indian faith leaders to foster understanding and respect. It is because of our close relationship with the Government of India we are able to raise important issues where appropriate, including on the rights of minorities.”
There have been extensive investigations into the events of 2002
Conservative party member Theresa Villiers, Chipping Barnet reminded everyone that it is important to acknowledge that there have been extensive investigations into the events of 2002, including a special investigation team appointed in 2009 by the Supreme Court of India. A number of people have been convicted and given long prison sentences, and these matters have, of course, also been the subject of extensive scrutiny and debate in the Indian Parliament.
“The values of respect for the rule of law, parliamentary democracy and constitutional protection of the rights of religious minorities are at the heart of the Indian political system, and those values have shaped the response to the tragic events in Gujarat. There has been a clear determination to learn from what happened, to do everything possible to stop such riots from ever occurring again and to bring to justice the perpetrators of this completely unacceptable violence and rioting,” Villiers said.
NCGO writes a letter to Labour MP Kim Leadbeater
In a letter titled ‘2002 Gujarat Riots Westminster Hall Debate’ the National Council of Gujarati Organisations, UK wrote to Labour MP Kim Leadbeater about the debate that was held in the UK parliament on the 20th anniversary of Gujarat riots. The letter is as follows:
“National Council of Gujarati Organisations is an umbrella organisation that represents over 100 Gujarati organisations that represent all Gujaratis in the UK. In relation to your motion to discuss the 2002 Gujarat riots, our organisation and community cannot understand the reason for this debate other than to cause unrest amongst the diverse communities in the UK who have lived peacefully since the horrific riots in 2002.
“Your introduction into the debate lacked the full details of the riots which were instigated by the burning of a train in Godhra on 27 February 2002, which caused the deaths of 58 Hindu pilgrims Karsevaks returning from Ayodhya. Under successive Indian governments, there has been continuous parliamentary and judicial supervision of the investigations into the riots including free debate and discussion in the parliament of India.
“As the largest democracy, the report of the SIT constituted by the Supreme Court of India has been in the public domain. In your speech, you also suggest no acceptable conclusions for all parties, communities and faiths have been reached when has that ever been possible in these kinds of situations. Since the debate there has constant arguments between the communities on social media etc.
“We understand and empathise with all the families that were affected by this sad event but to bring this up after 20 years when all investigations and reports are public shows the lack of respect for the people who lost their lives and the investigating Government. In relation to the investigation on the repatriation of bodies should you not have invited a member of the High Commission of India to this debate. Our indication is that nobody from the Indian High Commission London was contacted by yourself or your constituents to represent Indian interest in this debate. Why?
“We also understand that lessons need to be learned from the past but not at the expense of instigating further disharmony within the community. This we feel has been a very irresponsible behaviour by a Labour MP in provoking disharmony amongst the Indian community and needs to apologise for ill-timed and unwarranted motion. We look forward to hearing from you and your party. “
Yours faithfully
Vimalji Odedra
NCGO UK President
Lord Dolar Popat told Asian Voice, “The UK Parliament is the mother of all Parliaments. It is the beacon of democracy where we champion free speech. However, it has come to light that Parliamentary time is often taken advantage of to further other political agendas, namely promoting an anti-India bias. This has been witnessed time and time again recently. I urge Parliamentarians from all sides to ensure debates are not hijacked for other means.”
In an official statement to the newsweekly, Ameet Jogia and Reena Ranger OBE, Co-Chairs, Conservative Friends of India said, “The riots in Gujarat in 2002 reflect a dark time in India’s history. However, 20 years on, instead of reflecting and focusing on healing and building a better future, the Labour Party tabled a debate in Parliament last week which seems to only have served the purpose of division in an area where the UK Labour Party can only cause more tensions and little resolution
“The debate was yet another example of the Labour Party championing anti-India rhetoric in Parliament. India is the world’s largest democracy and has the mechanisms to undertake extensive investigations on the incident. In Gujarat, this matter has been the focus of many enquiries and that too even by the Supreme Court of India.
“The Labour Party should focus on bringing communities together and learning the lessons of history to ensure a better future. Whilst there are many differences between the Conservative and Labour Friends of India – we are united in our mission to promote India and champion bilateral relations between our two great countries. Perhaps our friends in the Labour Party will work to address this increasing anti-India rhetoric coming from their Party.”
Asian Voice reached out to several other MPs and members of the Labour Party to get an official statement on this matter, but did not hear from them until we went to print on Tuesday, 15 February.
