Siyaset, Toplum ve Şiddet: 2002 Gujarat Olaylarında Hindistan Polisinin Rolü Üzerine Bir İnceleme

Öz

2019’da Hindistan’da yapılan genel seçimlerde aşırı sağcı ve Hintli milliyetçi Narendra Modi yeniden Başbakan seçilmeyi başardı. Modi, iktidarı süresince ve seçim esnasında kullandığı İslam karşıtı söylem nedeniyle eleştirilmiştir. Dahası, onun bu Müslüman karşıtı tutumunun Hint toplumunu böleceğine dair endişeler var. Modi’nin siyasi geçmişi göz önüne alındığında, bu endişelerin meşru bir dayanağı olduğu görülür. Bağımsız raporlara göre Modi ve BJP partisinin 2002 yılında Hindistan’ın Gujarat eyaletinde meydana gelen şiddet olaylarında aktif olduğuna dair kanıtlar mevcuttur. İsyan 2002 yılında Hindu hacıları taşıyan bir trenin yanmasıyla başlamıştı. Olayın ardından Müslümanlara yönelik şiddet bir yıl sürdü ve 1000’den fazla kişi hayatını kaybetti. Raporlara göre, polis memurları Müslümanlara yönelik saldırıları engellemedi ve hatta Hindu çetelerin silah bulması için yardım ettiler. Bu yazıda polisin rolü devlet, siyaset ve sivil toplum ilişkisi ekseninde tartışılacaktır. Gujarat isyanının bir vaka olarak seçilmesinin temel nedeni, Modi’nin günümüzde Hindistan geneline yayılan dışlama politikalarının o dönemde bölgesel düzeyde deneyimlenmiş olmasıdır. Üstelik bu süreçte, polisin Gujarat şiddetinde ayrımcı tutumu, Modi ve partisi tarafından desteklenmiştir. Bu nedenle isyanlarda polisin rolünü incelemek önem kazanmaktadır. Belgeleme yöntemiyle toplanan veriler, Rainer’in polislik teorisinde tartışılacaktır. Rainer’e göre polisin tacizinin dört ana nedeni vardır: Tarafgirlik, önyargı, farklılaşma ve ayrımcılık. Buna ek olarak, Hindistan polisinin siyasallaşması, hükümet ve polis tacizi arasındaki örtük ilişkiyi anlamak için incelenecektir. Sonuç olarak polis teşkilatının ideolojik, dini ve etnik yönden motive edildiğinde toplumun belirli kesimlerini dışlayarak hareket ettiği tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hindistan
• Gujarat
• şiddet
• milliyetçilik
• Polis teorileri

Politics, Society and Violence: The Role of the Indian Police in the 2002 Gujarat Riots

Öz

In the general elections held in India in 2019, the far-right Indian nationalist Narendra Modi managed to be re-elected as Prime Minister. Modi has been criticized for the anti-Islamic discourse he used during his rule and election process. Moreover, there are concerns that the anti-Muslim attitude will divide Indian society. There are justifications for these concerns, given Modi’s political background. Modi and his BJP party are believed to be active in the violence that took place in the state of Gujarat in India in 2002. During the riots, more than 1,000 people lost their lives. According to reports, police officers did not stop attacks against Muslims and they helped Hindu mobs find lethal weapons. In this article, the role of the police will be discussed within the axis of the relationship between the state, politics and civil society. The main reason why the Gujarat riots were chosen as a case study is that the exclusionary policies of Modi across India were experienced at the regional level in 2002. Furthermore, the discriminatory action of police in the violence of the Gujarat riots was supported by Modi and his party. Therefore, it becomes important to examine the role of the police in these riots. The data, which was collected through the documentation method, will be discussed in relation to Rainer’s policing theory. According to Rainer there are four main reasons for police abuse, which are: prejudice, bias, differentiation and discrimination. In addition, the politicization of Indian police will be examined to understand the implicit relationship between government and police abuse. As a result, it has been determined that when motivated ideologically, religiously and ethnically, the police organization acts by excluding certain segments of the society.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• India
• Gujarat
• violence
• nationalism
• Policing theories

Kaynakça

1. Baker, Peter, and Thomas Kaplan. “Trump Defends Police, but Says He’ll Sign Order Encouraging Better Practices”. The New York Times, 11 June 2020, blm. U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/11/us/politics/ trump-biden-police.html.
2. Bhatt, Chetan. Hindu Nationalism: Origins, Ideologies and Modern Myths. Oxford: Berg, 2001.
3. Bock, Pauline. “Emmanuel Macron’s Year of Cracking Heads”. Foreign Policy, 29 November 2019. https:// foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/29/emmanuel-macrons-france-yellow-jackets-police-europe-year-of-crackingheads/.
4. Chhibber, Pradeep. “Who Voted for the Bharatiya Janata Party?” British Journal of Political Science 27, no 4 (October 1997): 619-59.
5. Chipper, Pradeep, and Rahul Verma. “The BJP’s 2014 Resurgence”. in Electoral Politics in India: The Resurgence of the Bharatiya Janata Party, 15-33. Taylor & Francis, 2017.
6. Cohen, Stanley. Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment and Classification. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1985.
7. Corbridge, Stuart, Nikhila Kalra, and Kayoko Tatsumi. “The Search for Order: Understanding Hindu-Muslim Violence in Post-Partition India”. Pacific Affairs 85, no 2 (2012): 287-311.
8. Curran, Jean A. “The RSS: Militant Hinduism”. Far Eastern Survey 19, no 10 (1950): 93-98. doi:10.2307/3023941.

9. Engineer, Asghar Ali. “Gujarat Riots in the Light of the History of Communal Violence”. Economic and Political Weekly 37, no 50 (2002): 5047-54.
10. ———. “Srikrishna Commission Report: Painstaking Documentation”. Economic and Political Weekly 33, no 33/34 (1998): 2215-16.
11. Ghosh, Deepshikha. “Amit Shah Termite Remark On Immigrants Unwanted, Says Bangladesh”, 24 September 2018. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/amit-shah-termite-remark-on-immigrants-unwanted-saysbangladesh- 1921088. “Gujarat chief minister resigns”, 19 July 2002. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2139008.stm. “Gujarat riot death toll revealed”, 11 May 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4536199.stm.
12. Hasisi, Badi, and Ronald Weitzer. “Police Relations with Arabs and Jews In Israel”. The British Journal of Criminology 47, no 5 (2007): 728-45.
13. “Hindustan News”, 03 May 2002.
14. “India”. International Religious Freedom Report 2002. https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2002/14023.htm.
15. “India braces for religious violence”, 28 February 2002. https://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/ south/02/27/india.train/index.html.
16. “India: Gujarat Officials Took Part in Anti-Muslim Violence”. Human Rights Watch, 30 April 2002. https:// www.hrw.org/news/2002/04/30/india-gujarat-officials-took-part-anti-muslim-violence. “Indian MPs Back Gujarat Motion”, 06 May 2002. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1970415.stm.
17. “Intimidation and Harassment of Witnesses, Human Rights Activists, and Lawyers Pursuing Accountability for the 2002 Communal Violence in Gujarat”. Human Right Watch, 24 April 2004. https://www.hrw.org/ legacy/backgrounder/asia/india/gujarat/gujarat0904.pdf. Jaffrelot, Christophe.
18. “Communal Riots in Gujarat: The State at Risk?” Working paper. C. 17, 2003. “Kashmir’s special status: Five things to know”, 05 July 2019. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/8/5/ kashmir-special-status-explained-what-are-articles-370-and-35a.
19. Katju, Manjari. Vishva Hindu Parishad and Indian Politics. Hyderabad: Orient Longman, 2003. Khan, Yasmin. The Great Partition: The Making of India and Pakistan. London: Yale University Press, 2007.
20. Macpherson, Sir William. “The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry”. UK Secretary of State for the Home Department,1999. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_ data/file/277111/4262.pdf.
21. McDonnell, Duncan, and Luis Cabrera. “The right-wing populism of India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (and why comparativists should care)”. Democratization 26, no 3 (03 April 2019): 484-501.
22. McLeod, John. The History of India. First Edition. Westport, Conn: Greenwood, 2002.
23. Metcalf, Barbara D., and Thomas R. Metcalf. A Concise History of Modern India. 3. ed. Cambridge Concise Histories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
24. Mitra C., Kamal, S. P. Shukla, and K. S. Subramanian. “Dr Kamal Mitra Chenoy, S. P. Shukla, K. S. Subramanian, Achin Vanaik”. The Independent Fact Finding Mission, 2002.
25. Perrigo, Billy. “Supreme Court Orders Review of Internet Shutdown in Kashmir”. Time, 10 January 2020. https://time.com/5762751/internet-kashmir-supreme-court/.
26. Rao, Rajyasri. “Profile: The Vishwa Hindu Parishad”, 07 Mart 2002. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_ asia/1860202.stm.
27. Reiner, Robert. The Politics of the Police. 4th edition. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
28. Repucci, Sarah. “A Leaderless Struggle for Democracy”. Washington: Freedom House, 2020. “Scores Killed in India Train Attack”, 27 February 2002. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1843591.stm.
29. Scull, Andrew. Social Order/Mental Disorder: Anglo-American Psychiatry in Historical Perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989.
30. Setalvad, Teesta. “When guardians betrays : the role of the police”. in Gujarat, the making of a tragedy, editör Siddharth Varadarajan, 177-210. New Delhi ; New York: Penguin Books, 2002.
31. “ ‘Shoot the Traitors’ Discrimination Against Muslims under India’s New Citizenship Policy”. Human Right Watch, 2020.
32. Sridharan, E. “Electoral Politics in India”. in Middle-Class Votes for BJP, 270-81. Routledge India, 2017.
33. Bhalotra Sonia, Irma Clots-Figueras and Lakshmi Iyer, Politician Identity, Policy Implementation and Human Development Outcomes, International Growth Center: London, 2013.
34. Stewart, Eric A., Eric P. Baumer, Rod K. Brunson, and Ronald L. Simons. “Neighborhood Racial Context and Perceptions of Police-Based Racial Discrimination Among Black Youth”. Criminology 47, no 3 (2009): 847-87.