Ishrat in bin-Laden's shoes, Obama in Modi's?

Imagine if the US President Barack Obama too was pursued by the investigators. The most potent argument in the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case is that the rule of law does not allow even terrorists being killed in an extra-judicial manner. Fair enough!

The US and India, both victims of terrorist attacks, fight war on terror differently. While there is a clear absence of politics in the state policy of the US on terror, abundance of political interference makes India's fight against terror messy and clumsy.

The Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case is apparently a turning point in the history of India's fight against terror. Spirited efforts are being made to give a credence to the conspiracy theory in the alleged fake encounter. And a number of institutions, critical in fight against terror, are being administered poison pills in the process.

In crude terms, killings of Ishrat Jahan and her male accomplices could at best have been murder cases, 

with sources of bullets found on bodies facing the charges. This much would have been easy for prosecution. But to prove conspiracy behind the killings, that too of political heads, would be asking for moon from the investigators. The prosecutors and investigators know to their best abilities, that to prove conspiracy behind the fake encounter killing of Ishrat Jahan would need enormous circumstantial evidences, which would most likely remain elusive to pin down their obvious targets -- Gujrat chief minister Narendra Modi (safed dadhi- white beard) and his close aide Amit Shah (kali dadhi - black beard).

But there is much to gain in keeping the pot boiling -- politically. This allows the ruling dispensation -- UPA -- an alibi to brand its most potent foe as someone who has blood on his hands.

So, the CBI, which was named "Congress Bureau of Investigation" by former Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh, continues to hunt in its apparent bid to keep the pot boiling. This interests media and drawing room discussions and in the process serving the inherent political motive. 

Imagine if the US President Barack Obama too was pursued by the investigators in similar fashion. The most potent argument in the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case is that the rule of law does not allow even terrorists being killed in an extra-judicial manner. Fair enough!

The voluminous report of a commission constituted by Pakistan has stated that the al-Qaeda fugitive Osama bin-Laden was killed in cold blood. He did not fire a single bullet in his defense. The report is based on multiple eyewitness accounts. So, the killing of bin-Laden was a fake encounter and extra-judicial. Additionally, the US Navy Seal helicopters had taken off from a base in Afghanistan and violated Pakistan's territorial sovereignty. Hence, it was an extra-territorial killing too. For those who know the law will state that bin-Laden killing is a fit case for the trial of Obama in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). 

What's more, the US policy to direct drone attacks within the Pakistani territory to kill terrorists, with army men and innocents killed as collateral damage, also violates rule of law and territorial sovereignty. Extra-territorial and extra-judicial killings -- another ground from Obama's trial in ICJ.

Arguably, the war on terror can not be fight by legal purists. Those who swear by rule of law mostly watch acts of terror on their TV sets. None in the world blinked their eyes even once when the US waged a war against Iraq on fictitious grounds of presence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Saddam Hussain's country. Icing on the cake has been India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh going extra mile to fete the US; from George Bush to Barack Obama. 

But the same UPA, when it comes to fight the terror, allows its "foot-in-the-mouth" politicians like Digvijay Singh, Salman Khurshid to wreak havoc on the police, investigative agencies, etc. While cases are being withdrawn against terror suspects by the Akhilsh Yadav administration in UP, which is a laboratory of the Indian Mujahiddin, efforts to preempt terror strikes are being frustrated.

After 9/11, the US has not seen any major terror strikes. It's for obvious reason, that a clear and specific command flows from the President, that all means be employed to eliminate sources of terror. Not so in India, though.

The Intelligence Bureau (IB) too did the same in events which led to the killings of Ishrat Jahan and her associates."Amjad Ali Rana and Zeeshan Johar were LeT operatives. Pranesh Pillai (claimed to be a Gujrat police informer) could have been double-crossing. The IB had definite information about them, which they accordingly passed on to the Gujrat police. As far as Ishrat is concerned, one may ask what was she doing with terrorists if she was not one," said a senior official, who has overseen a number of high profile investigations.
 
The apologists and those who seek political premium in the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter would prop up their sole argument, that even terrorists are not killed in an extra-judicial manner. They need to spend some time with the police, for fake encounter is apparently inherent in their practice to eliminate sources of threat for various factors. 

"If Modi is sought to be implicated for the fake encounter of Ishrat Jahan, then by the same argument former Home Minister P Chidambaram too becomes a suspect in the killing of CPI (Maoist) spokesperson and central committee member Azad Cherukuri Rajkumar by Andhra police in an encounter, considered fake by most, near Sarkapalli village in Adilabad. Will Chidambaram stand trial at some time in future if another government asks the CBI to explore conspiracy behind this fake encounter," said the official quoted earlier. 

  
A Pandora's box may open if top institutions are politically exploited in the manner as is being done. The IB, whatever strength it has, appears to have been given a mortal blow by the UPA government by leaning over to the CBI in its bid to further its political goals. The CBI may even have forgotten its true character and mandate by now. The institution of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has been belittled earlier. 

You may be forgiven if you harm a few men, but not if you harm institutions.

In the US, the state owns up operations against terror, which, incidentally, is not a case with India. It's high time India divorces politics from its war on terror.