The volley of fear

If so, try explaining Sehrunissa’s narrative in The Sunday Express. In a narrative of intimidation and apprehension, she attempts to explain why she turned a hostile witness in the most high-profile trial in cases related to post-Godhra violence in Gujarat. It is difficult to comprehend it, this silence in court that resulted in the acquittal of all those accused of torching her husband’s Vadodara bakery and killing 14 persons — among them Sehrunissa’s relatives. But listen to her, and the reasons take shape. She received threats, she says, that she would be killed if she repeated in court what she had said outside: That on March 1 she and her daughter, Zaheera, heard a mob approach, that they to ran the terrace, that they recognised many among them. The threats, she adds, also came from fellow witnesses. In other words, she stood isolated not only from her attackers and their benefactors, but also from fellow witnesses. She feared. For her life. For her daughter’s life.

To understand what Sehrunissa’s words mean for our criminal justice system, remember that those legal arguments are tossed back and forth in an atmosphere surcharged with fear. Remember that the reassuring rhythm of legalese is often not carried beyond the courtroom’s hallowed precincts by victims of violence. If outside there is intimidation, beyond the safe enclave of the court also lies fear. That must be the lesson for all those who profess to be seeking justice — whether they be in the police or whether they be concerned citizens. As a host of other Gujarat riots cases proceed in court, as many other cases related to the 1984 and 1993 riots drag on, witnesses must be re-assured — with physical security and legal back-up.