'Militant' on a mission with wife and child for company

Apparently, the 40-year-old Liyaqat Shah, after spending almost 16 years in wilderness, had decided to return home with a hope of a peaceful life ahead of him.  Irrespective of the Delhi Police claim, a frail looking Liyaqat hardly fits the description of a hardened suicide bomber. 

Had there been even an iota of doubt in chief minister Omar Abdullah’s mind, particularly in the presence of a hyperactive electronic media in the habit of hair-splitting, he would have never dared to question the veracity of a “concocted” suicide attack plan so vociferously. “The Delhi Police have failed to explain how a man returning to India with his wife and child was on a terror mission. If a man comes to attack a shopping mall, will he come with his wife and child? This is the first time that I am hearing that a militant came to attack holding the hand of his wife and carrying weapons in the other hand, as if going for a picnic,” mocked the chief minister of J&K in the state assembly.

And when has a suicide bomber, about to carry-out a terror attack, come after fully informing the police — Liyaqat‘s first wife Ameena, as per the state police record, had “applied for his immensity on February 2, 2011” under the flagship scheme of J&K police, devised for the return of militants who had crossed over to Pakistani side of Kashmir in the exuberance of their youth during 1990s.  A majority of these youth, caught in unfortunate circumstances, after repenting their fate, were sending feelers to the state government through their families for long, in the hope of getting a chance to make a fresh beginning. 

Liyaqat’s case was duly processed by the state authorities. And. according to his family, “he told us 10 days ago that he was coming and we informed the authorities”.  Not only was the J&K police fully aware of his immediate return via Nepal along with his second wife and children, even the Intelligence Bureau (IB) was also kept in the loop.

Still, why the Delhi police decided to enact a drama of an imminent suicide attack may be bewildering; actually, it reflects the highly biased mindset of the security establishment prevailing in the country against the Muslim youth.  Prominent journalist Sagarika Ghose in her recent column in a national daily while discussing the predisposition of the security establishment has scathingly remarked that “when in doubt about a terror investigation, blame the most readily available Muslims”.

She has aptly quoted the two glaring instances of journalist Muthi-ur Rahman Siddiqui of Bangalore and DRDO scientist Aijaz Mirza. While the court exonerated the two after the “National Investigation Agency (NIA) admitted it could find no evidence against them”, ironically, the media continued to label Siddiqui as an “alleged terrorist” even after his honour was fully restored by the court. In the case of Aijaz Mirza, the court acquittal could only insure his freedom; he was still dismissed from service by his employer DRDO.

Of what little use is such an acquittal if it’s unable to restore the public trust of a person falsely implicated in a terror-related incident?  The slow moving wheel of justice is only competent to debunk the false charges; however, it’s unable to reform the ingrained biased psyche of the security apparatus.   

The horrible ordeal of Malegaon and Mecca Masjid blasts accused who, after long wrongful incarcerations, were finally found innocent, is very much fresh in public memory.

Ghose has narrated another horrifying example of 2007 Mecca Masjid blast accused Imran. He “given third degree torture and electric shocks, was accused of spending 10 years training as a terrorist in Pakistan. Since Imran was 22 at the time of his arrest, it would mean that he had run away to Pakistan to become a terrorist at the age of 12! After 18 months in jail, Imran was acquitted. 

And the “rebelling’ Kashmiri youth seems to be the prime victim of this prejudiced mindset. Omar Abdullah in order to protect the credibility of his much publicised militant rehabilitation scheme, doggedly — and rightly so — pursued Liyaqat’s case with the central government. As a result, Union Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde has ordered a probe by NIA in the Liyaqat fiasco. However, there is many a slip between cup and the lip.

The home minster has only ordered a probe. As Liyaqat is yet to get a clean chit, his returning home anytime soon is still a distant possibility. Seemingly, Liyaqat is not directly involved in any terror activity. He is either romanticising the idea of militancy, or else got carried away unknowingly by the surge of emotion all-around him and crossed over to Pakistan, not once but twice. Growing sick of his disgusting condition in an alien atmosphere, he contemplated going back home, an innate human desire.

In case he is not fortunate enough to be able to prove his non-involvement in the alleged suicide attack plan, his desire for  penance and peaceful life may prove to be his final undoing. At worst, he would be made to rot in a jail for the rest of his life. And if he is little fortunate — when the prosecution (expectedly) fails to prove the charges — the court may exonerate him. But by that time he would have spent a lifetime of 16 years behind the bars. It’s not mere polemics or rhetoric we are indulging in: Several Kashmir youths were exonerated from terrorism charges only after languishing 10-15 long years behind the bars.

The Delhi police may eventually fail to prove the charges against Liyaqat, still it needs to do a lot of explaining. Why did it have to enact a drama of suicide attack?

The author, based in Srinagar, writes on contemporary issues.