Ghazala Wahab

Two curious things happened within a span of a week in September.

On September 21, Delhi police in its charge-sheet against those it has accused of instigating the February 2020 riots in Delhi qualified the suspects as terrorists. A first in India. Historically, communal violence in India has been treated as law and order issue. Seldom has a person been charged with instigating or carrying out communal violence, let alone serve prison term. Clearly, India is changing. Incidentally, this list of suspects comprises largely students, civil society activists and politicians. Another first in India. Traditionally, communal violence has been blamed on small time politicians and lumpen elements. The additional detail that most of those charged with planning the riots as well as the victims of riots are Muslims, may be of some consequence.

To forcefully make its case, Delhi police’s final report, duly signed by deputy commissioner and assistant commissioner of police, takes recourse to some mysterious global definition of terrorism. It says ‘internationally, terrorist activity is defined as the use of violence to force a government to accept/ submit to political demands.’

Thereafter to further explain what terrorist activity is, the report falls back on government of India’s Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Quoting Section 15, it says, ‘In this case, the use of firearms, petrol bombs… causing death of police personnel and grievous injuries… with intention to overawe the State and force the central government to withdraw CAA, NRC clearly falls in the definition of terrorist activity.’ (Indian Express 22 September 2020). Interestingly, there is no universal or global definition of terrorism. But more on that later.

The second curious thing was Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s virtual pre-recorded address to the United Nations on 27 September 2020. The media, wont to speculate, was rife with reports that the Prime Minister would once again (as he had done in the past) call out Pakistan, and make a strong pitch against terrorism. Some wrote that the Prime Minister would draw attention to China too.

None of this happened. While China remained ‘one who must not be named’, terrorism was a mere footnote, mentioned in the context of the role India would play at the UN once its term as a non-permanent member of th