09-28-2004, 11:36 PM
What a systematic campaign to vilify and demonify sarvarkar for the last 4 mths.
Now after his death 40 years ago there is a renewed campaign to indoctrinate the public as if the public is stupid to find out the real facts.
This news reports about the old history and during the charged days of partition are selectively used to give an impression that the days were peacful and there was no provokation for any violence.
``Requirement of corroborative evidence aided Savarkar's acquittal''
By Our Special Correspondent
A.G. Noorani at an interaction with journalists of The Hindu in Chennai on Tuesday.
CHENNAI, SEPT. 28. The requirement of corroborative evidence in Indian law, based on the British model, helped in the acquittal of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in the Mahatma Gandhi assassination case, according to A.G. Noorani, constitutional expert and writer.
Delivering a lecture on Savarkar at the Asian College of Journalism here today, Mr. Noorani said three key factors contributed to the acquittal of Savarkar. There was no material that could, in legal terms, corroborate the evidence of the approver (Digambar Badge) in the case. None of the major witnesses was "forthcoming" (about the relationship between Savarkar and Gandhi's assassin Nathuram Godse).
Substantiating his statement that Savarkar organised the murder of Gandhi, the constitutional expert who authored "Savarkar and Hindutva: The Godse Connection," said even at the time of the trial, there was evidence about the political and ideological association of Savarkar and Godse. More material on this came to light a few years after Sarvarkar's deathin 1966 when his aides appeared before a Commission of Inquiry, headed by J.L. Kapur, former Supreme Court Judge. Also, the material accessed by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, authors of ``Freedom at Midnight," could also have fulfilled the requirements of corroborative evidence.
Mr. Noorani said the Bharatiya Janata Party wanted to portray Sarvarkar as a national hero as "he represented ideas which are dear to it." It was Savarkar who propounded the theory of Hindutva in 1923 and clearly pointed out that Hindutva should not be identified with Hinduism. He advocated the expulsion of Muslims and Christians be "expelled" because not all born in India were Indians. The then chief of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) M.S. Gowalkar, in his "Bunch of Thoughts" published in the 1960s, had acknowledged that he drew inspiration from Savarkar.
Describing "cultural nationalism" as the shorthand of `Hindutva,' Mr. Noorani pointed out that the BJP advocated this concept in its election manifestoes of 1996 and 1998. However, "this was not the ideology that Aurobindo and Swami Vivekananda stood for."
Comparing Savarkar and Bhagat Singh, Mr. Noorani said that while the former never wielded the gun but "committed murders by proxy," the latter shot a man who he thought was responsible for the death of his mentor, Lala Lajpat Rai. Savarkar submitted letters of apology to the British authorities in 1911, 1913, 1918 and 1925 and provided undertakings in 1948 and 1950 to refrain from political activity, but Bhagat Singh, even while facing the gallows, refused to apologise to the British and rebuked his father, who, out of paternal feelings, had submitted a clemency petition.
N. Ram, Editor-in-Chief of The Hindu , who moderated the discussion, said those who sought to bring the issue of Savarkar on the public agenda were themselves making the complaint why should "old issues" be raised in a new way to divert attention from serious problems. In this context, he referred to the responses to thetwo recent articles published by the newspaper on the Savarkar-Godse connection.
Now after his death 40 years ago there is a renewed campaign to indoctrinate the public as if the public is stupid to find out the real facts.
This news reports about the old history and during the charged days of partition are selectively used to give an impression that the days were peacful and there was no provokation for any violence.
``Requirement of corroborative evidence aided Savarkar's acquittal''
By Our Special Correspondent
A.G. Noorani at an interaction with journalists of The Hindu in Chennai on Tuesday.
CHENNAI, SEPT. 28. The requirement of corroborative evidence in Indian law, based on the British model, helped in the acquittal of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in the Mahatma Gandhi assassination case, according to A.G. Noorani, constitutional expert and writer.
Delivering a lecture on Savarkar at the Asian College of Journalism here today, Mr. Noorani said three key factors contributed to the acquittal of Savarkar. There was no material that could, in legal terms, corroborate the evidence of the approver (Digambar Badge) in the case. None of the major witnesses was "forthcoming" (about the relationship between Savarkar and Gandhi's assassin Nathuram Godse).
Substantiating his statement that Savarkar organised the murder of Gandhi, the constitutional expert who authored "Savarkar and Hindutva: The Godse Connection," said even at the time of the trial, there was evidence about the political and ideological association of Savarkar and Godse. More material on this came to light a few years after Sarvarkar's deathin 1966 when his aides appeared before a Commission of Inquiry, headed by J.L. Kapur, former Supreme Court Judge. Also, the material accessed by Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, authors of ``Freedom at Midnight," could also have fulfilled the requirements of corroborative evidence.
Mr. Noorani said the Bharatiya Janata Party wanted to portray Sarvarkar as a national hero as "he represented ideas which are dear to it." It was Savarkar who propounded the theory of Hindutva in 1923 and clearly pointed out that Hindutva should not be identified with Hinduism. He advocated the expulsion of Muslims and Christians be "expelled" because not all born in India were Indians. The then chief of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) M.S. Gowalkar, in his "Bunch of Thoughts" published in the 1960s, had acknowledged that he drew inspiration from Savarkar.
Describing "cultural nationalism" as the shorthand of `Hindutva,' Mr. Noorani pointed out that the BJP advocated this concept in its election manifestoes of 1996 and 1998. However, "this was not the ideology that Aurobindo and Swami Vivekananda stood for."
Comparing Savarkar and Bhagat Singh, Mr. Noorani said that while the former never wielded the gun but "committed murders by proxy," the latter shot a man who he thought was responsible for the death of his mentor, Lala Lajpat Rai. Savarkar submitted letters of apology to the British authorities in 1911, 1913, 1918 and 1925 and provided undertakings in 1948 and 1950 to refrain from political activity, but Bhagat Singh, even while facing the gallows, refused to apologise to the British and rebuked his father, who, out of paternal feelings, had submitted a clemency petition.
N. Ram, Editor-in-Chief of The Hindu , who moderated the discussion, said those who sought to bring the issue of Savarkar on the public agenda were themselves making the complaint why should "old issues" be raised in a new way to divert attention from serious problems. In this context, he referred to the responses to thetwo recent articles published by the newspaper on the Savarkar-Godse connection.