Maharani on the edge

Despite an action-replay of promises, Vasundhara Raje betrayed them repeatedly. The Gujjar agitation turned violent for many reasons, not least of which is the pent-up rage of a community that has been wronged against for the last half century

Kavita Srivastava Jaipur

The week-long eruption of public anger by the Gujjar community on the streets of Rajasthan between May 29 and June 4, 2007 has to be seen in terms of a government that uses brute power to silence public protest and uses divisive politics — pitting one community against the other instead of politically dealing with problems of the people. This is not the first time that these methods have been used; in the past most people's movements in the state have faced bullets and aggressive counter protests from another community.

More than 12 police firings since 2004 preceded these killings. They have left more than 27 protesting civilians dead and hundreds injured. Even children protesting against the transfer of their school principal were not spared bullets in October 2004. The farmers of Gharsana of Sri Ganganagar district bore the worst brunt of police firing while demanding sufficient water from the Indira Gandhi Canal to save their crops; they, instead, got bullets, which killed six people between October 27, 2004 to December 2006.

Similarly, five people were killed on June 13, 2005. This was when farmers of Jhirana, Tonk district were sitting on a day-long road-block at Sohela demanding water for their farms from the neighbouring Bisalpur Dam as promised by Vasundhara Raje while campaigning in the 2003 assembly elections. The two firing incidents did result in setting up of judicial commissions to examine the use of police firing on the protestors. But nothing much has moved, as in the case of the brazen killings of the Gujjars during the current agitation.

In the final round of negotiations with Col Kirori Singh Bainsala, leader of the Gujjar Arakshan Sangharsh Samiti, on August 4, 2007, Home Minister Gulab Chand Kataria reportedly told the delegation leading the Gujjars that the government would agree for the setting up of a judicial committee to examine whether they deserved ST status, only if they withdrew their demand of a judicial enquiry into the killings. He also added that setting up a commission would go against them as they had video footage of the Gujjar community destroying public property and becoming violent.

The fact-finding report of the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), Rajasthan, the People's Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR), Delhi, Association for Democratic Rights (AFDR), Punjab, (PUCL-PUDR-AFDR) which investigated each police firing has shown that firing was unwarranted and it was only after the killings that the Gujjars retaliated, attacking the police or destroying public property. The government needs to explain how the police firing on May 29 took place at 7.30 am at Patoli-Peepal Khera on National Highway-11 (NH-11), even though the announced time for the protest was 11am; also, why four of the six bodies of civilians who were fired at were at a distance of 200 to 300 metres from the highway. Out of the six who died, five post mortem reports show the bullet entry wound from the back.

Similarly, in Bundi, the government needs to explain why, on the morning of May 29, more than 150 rounds were used when people were closeted in the Dev Narayan  Temple — they were not outside on NH-12. How were bullets fired at people on the fourth floor of the temple or why people fleeing from the temple towards the hillock have got bullets on their backs.

The most difficult part for the government to explain would be about the Bolin (Sawai Madhopur) killings on May 31, where workers, after completing their work from the NREGA work site, were going to have a free meal at Bolin town, where a Bhagwat Puja was taking place since May 23. The police fired in panic when it saw a crowd heading towards the puja. Four people died — among the injured were two dalits.

There can be no justification in allowing the murder of four Gujjars who were part of the 150 to 200 crowd who had caused a road-block on the Dausa-Lalsot road at Ghata. The police and administration allowed the several thousand Meena community members, who came from all sides, to attack them. According to several eye-witnesses, the police allowed the Gujjars to be massacred.   

In the backdrop of the Supreme Court observations of calling the Gujjar agitation a “national shame”, the government has lodged 354 cases against the community in Rajasthan. Today, even those injured and needing treatment have been sent back home: the BJP government has no commitment of justice towards the dead or the injured.

Apart from letters and faxes to the government and reports in local newspapers about the road-block, the mode of agitation used most effectively by the protestors was distribution of pamphlets in every district announcing the objectives of the road-block in every district. We came across three such pamphlets, one written by Col Bainsala, the other by the National Secretary of the Akhil Bharatiya Gurjar Mahasabha from Bandikuin and another from the president of the Bundi district.

The pamphlet by Col Bainsala is an appeal to the Gujjar masses to join the struggle. He gave a call to make the road-block successful as it was connected with social justice. This pamphlet talks of how people should come with their own arrangement of food and water for three days, as the main objective was to get the Rajasthan government to give a letter to the Centre recommending that the Gujjars be considered eligible for ST status. Although the letter states that the people should come prepared for a three day sit-in, it also announces that since obtaining the letter was the goal of this agitation, if required, the people should be prepared to stay longer.

The pamphlet states how in the period of the agitation, several 'Bhagwat Katha' programmes were organised between May 28 and June 1, where there was a provision of free food. The pamphlet makes a request to postpone these events as it was important to sacrifice any personal and private interest for the sake of community interest. It suggests that in case some people still go ahead with these events then food and sweets should not be eaten.

The pamphlet gives a note of caution at the end. It states that the road-block should be organised peacefully and democratically. It makes an appeal against any violence or looting and rioting and the prevention of activity that will trouble the administration; it states that whoever joins the struggle should apply their mind and come to the dharna. Several lakh pamphlets were distributed around the state by Col Bainsla.

Another pamphlet was issued by the Gujjar Vikas Sangathan, Bundi. It addresses the Gujjars as Lions. The pamphlet talks of the commemoration of the death anniversary of 'Lion' Vijay Singh Pathik at the Dev Narayan Mandir on the Bundi Bye Pass road. It states that on May 29, the Gujjars will be holding a state-wide agitation to highlight the demand of their eligibility under ST status: in Bundi, a massive public meeting would be organised. The pamphlet gives a call to women to come in large numbers, and as in all the pamphlets asks the people to hold a peaceful agitation.

If all the pamphlets and open calls of the Gujjar reservation agitation talk of holding peaceful protests, then why did the agitation turn violent and become an all-Rajasthan agitation? It is important to ask these questions as it will be unfair to presume that the Gujjars are basically violent and therefore have no other way of responding politically, which, as the chronology of their political history proves, is a brazen falsity. 

The protests of the Gujjars has to be seen in terms of public expression of pent-up anger of a community that feels historically wronged and marginalised, while the ruling classes at both the Centre and the state enacted and implemented policies that eroded their traditional livelihood base and denied them  access to administrative and political power.  In order to understand the latter it is important to see how the struggle to be in the ST list is more than 40-years-old.

What follows in this report is a chronological account of how the Meena community in Rajasthan managed to get ST reservation but the Gujjars could not. Both the communities were notified as criminal tribes. Some Gujjar communities in 1933 were denotified, but the Meenas were not. There are several myths regarding how the Meenas got reservations and as to when the Gujjar agitation originally started. See Chronology.

Indeed, despite an action-replay of promises, Vasundhara Raje and the state BJP betrayed them repeatedly in the recent past. The Gujjar agitation turned violent for many reasons, not least of which is the pent-up rage of a community that has been wronged against repeatedly by all regimes for the last half century. That is why, marginalised and pushed to the wall, they are not only counting the number of the dead, they are also counting the number of promises betrayed since 50 years. And hence, the impending paradox of a final countdown.

The writer is General Secretary, PUCL, Rajasthan