‘Total failure of justice': all convicted of Mumbai train blasts acquitted
But 19 years on from the carnage of the attacks, which left 189 dead and more than 800 injured, justice remains elusive.
On Monday, 12 Muslim men who were convicted of planting the bombs were acquitted after the prosecution case against them was found to be based on forced confessions and unreliable evidence.
The suspects, who were accused of being Pakistani separatists, were convicted in 2015 for one of India's worst terror attacks. Five of the men were sentenced to death, while the other seven were given life imprisonment, pending an appeal.
A decade on from the conviction, judges at the Bombay High Court found the prosecution had 'utterly failed to prove their case against the accused'.
'It is hard to believe that the accused committed the crime. Hence their conviction is quashed and set aside,' Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak said.
The men were ordered to be released from jail 'if they are not required to be detained in any other case'.
During the 2006 attacks, seven bombs placed inside pressure cookers to maximise the intensity of the blasts went off within minutes of each other, causing horrific casualties. One surgeon described his hospital in the aftermath of the attacks as 'bloodier than an abattoir' in a report published on the front page of The Times the next day.
Prosecutors said the devices were assembled in Mumbai and deliberately placed in first-class coaches to target the city's wealthy Gujarati community.
They said the bombings were intended as revenge for the riots in the western state of Gujarat in 2002, which left some 2,000 people dead, most of them Muslims.
Prosecutors accused the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba of being behind the attacks, although a little-known outfit called Lashkar-e-Qahhar later claimed responsibility.
• Times report, 2006: 7 bombs, 10 minutes, 160 dead
On Monday the judges spoke witheringly of police failures to prove what kind of bombs were used. The explosives and arms presented as evidence appeared 'unrelated to the blasts,' they said.
Eye witnesses presented by the prosecution were also deemed unreliable, as many of them made statements to the police months or even years after the bombing. The judges observed that it was unlikely they would remember the accused after such a long period.
'The defence had raised serious questions about the test identification parade. Many witnesses remained silent for unusually long periods, some over four years, and then suddenly identified the accused. This is abnormal,' the judges noted.
Apparent confessions by the accused, they concluded, were likely to have been obtained through coercion.
One of those convicted, Kamal Ansari, died in 2021 from coronavirus while in jail. The remaining 11 have spent 19 years behind bars.
Monday's acquittal does not mean the saga is over, as the prosecution can appeal against the order to the Supreme Court in Delhi. Given that cases move very slowly through India's judicial system, and that it took a decade for the convictions to be overturned, the men are likely to remain behind bars for months if not years.
Rebecca Mammen John, a lawyer at the Supreme Court, said the investigation and prosecution did 'a disservice both to the people framed who spent years behind bars and to the families of the victims who are left without justice'.
'When you don't have a robust investigation and you have fabricated evidence, you are letting down an entire community of people who deserve better than this,' she added. 'This is a total failure of the justice delivery system.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
The rise of Japan's far right was supercharged by Trump
BBC Japanese politics is a usually steady ship, verging on the boring most of the time. Not anymore. Last Sunday, a once obscure far-right party, Sanseito, surged from one to 15 seats in the elections, making them a serious contender in Japan's political scene. With their "Japanese First" slogan, riffing off US President Donald Trump's "America First", they have truly ruffled the feathers of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its embattled prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba. For him, the last week was something of a rollercoaster. In the election, his ruling LDP coalition lost their majority in the upper house of Japan's parliament - having already lost control of the lower house last year - prompting calls for his resignation from his own party. By Wednesday, he had sealed a deal on tariffs with the US, which the US president called "massive". But while this gave the economy a badly-needed dose of stability, it still couldn't salvage Japan's politics from upheaval. Japan is one of the most stable democracies in the world; their elections are rarely surprising. The LDP has governed almost continuously since 1955 (except brief spells). It seemed immune to the populism seen in other countries. But the party now faces one of its most serious challenges in post-war history. So what turned the land of humdrum politics into a fierce political battleground - and drew many to the far right? Rice wars: anger in supermarkets It has been a tough few years for Japanese households. They have struggled with inflation, high prices, stagnant wages and a sluggish economy. Take the price of rice. It has doubled since last year and a typical 5kg bag of it now costs above 4,000 yen (£20) in supermarkets. This is partly due to a supply shortage caused by a bad harvest in 2023, but it was compounded by a powerful earthquake, which prompted warnings of a "megaquake" - causing shoppers to stockpile in panic. Footage on local TV channels and on social media showed long lines of people queuing to buy rice. Reuters "Rice is a staple for us. We've always sort of taken it for granted [but] this affects everyone, not just me and what my baby eats, but people's business as well," explains Momoko Abe, 36, who is shopping with her four-month daughter in a supermarket in northern Tokyo."It was quite shocking to see that the price could rise like this in such a short period." Another shopper, 65-year-old Watanabe Takeshi, tells me he doesn't have much choice. "It's expensive but we have to buy it. The price of rice is controlled by the government," he says. The agriculture minister, Shinjiro Koizumi, has vowed to bring prices down and to modify the supply chain - and more rice has already gone into the market - but prices remain high. It is a symptom of a government struggling to revive the economy and contain inflation. From 'America First' to 'Japan First' Young Japanese people in particular are fed up. "[We are] sick of the current political situation," a young voter called Eriko Harada told a news outlet at a Sanseito rally. Another young voter, Uta Kato, says: "It's simple. The reason Sanseito won so much support is because they speak on our behalf." Voters' frustration - and anger - is palpable in political rallies, as it is in the aisles of supermarkets. It's what, in part, drove many to support a "Japan First" party. But something else was at play too. "I think we can attribute a lot of this to ripples coming from the White House, from Maga land," argues Jeff Kingston, professor of Asian studies and history at Temple University in Tokyo, referencing the Make America Great Again movement that backed Trump. "Trump is empowering the primordial in people all over the world." Another parallel with Trump's Republicans, as well as other right-wing movements and parties across the world, is the focus on immigration. Japan has historically had very low levels of immigration but it has been on the rise. The number of foreign residents living in Japan at the end of last year was approximately 3.77 million - an increase of almost 11% from the previous year, and a new record high. Japan's population is ageing fast, and many argue that the country needs migrants to work, pay taxes, and take care of the ballooning numbers of elderly people. But others feel differently. "The number of foreign immigrants who don't obey the rules is increasing," argues the young voter Uta Kato. "The burden on citizens including taxes is bigger so life is getting more difficult." Sanseito blames the government for policies that have allowed more foreigners into the country. "We are not promoting xenophobia," the party's founder, Sohei Kamiya, said at a news conference in June. "Japanese people feel unease and dissatisfaction because there are no established rules for accepting foreigners." In another news conference he said: "Many citizens are frustrated that too much money is being spent on social security and education support for foreigners." Welfare minister Takamaro Fukuoka - of the LDP - has rebutted the claim that the government is providing favourable medical or welfare benefits to foreign residents. Still, the message resonates with supporters. "Foreigners are scary. I'm afraid they may go on a rampage," a 54-year-old Sanseito volunteer told the Asahi Shimbun newspaper. When asked why he feared foreigners, he admitted that he had not experienced any direct harm from them. A 35-year-old homemaker attending a Sanseito rally with her husband and child told the paper: "Sanseito says things that other parties don't say." But the far-right party's focus on foreigners doesn't just apply to people seeking to live in Japan. Sanseito has another, more unusual target on its list: tourists. Tourists taking selfies and behaving badly A weak yen has forced Japanese families to tighten their belts - but it also enables millions of tourists to enjoy holidays here (where their money goes a lot further than it used to). As a result, Japan has seen a large rise in incoming tourists. Almost 37 million of them travelled to Japan last year, according to the National Tourism Organisation - an all-time high. Most came from other east Asian countries, like China and South Korea, with a substantial minority also coming from the West. Some argue that tourists behave in an uncouth, disrespectful way - violating the strong norms of courtesy on which Japanese people pride themselves. Last November, a 65-year-old American tourist was arrested on suspicion of scrawling graffiti onto a wooden gate at the Meiji Jingu shrine in Tokyo. Also last year, residents in the town of Fujikawaguchiko admitted their frustration over tourists breaking traffic rules in order to photograph Mount Fuji, which looms over the area. The pretty town, in the foothills of the volcano, is often a base for climbers. It is also on the banks of Lake Kawaguchi. The area is known for its striking beauty - but eventually authorities erected a screen to block the view. "It's regrettable we have to do this because of some tourists who can't respect rules," a local official said. Kazuhiko Iwama, 65, who has lived in the town his whole life, told me about this at the time. "[Tourists] cross the street and they don't seem to care about the cars at all, it is dangerous," he said. "They leave trash and cigarette butts everywhere." Even after the mountain was shielded from view, some tourists found ways to take a selfie. Some incidents were caught on video and posted online. Spreading 'false information about foreigners' This all fuelled a frustration that led to many voters turning to Sanseito - and resulted in its ballot box success. But not everyone believes this was done fairly. Some analysts have argued that the right-wing party has conflated misbehaviour and bad manners by some tourists with Japan's immigration issue and lumped it into one "big foreign problem". "They have spread false information about foreigners [saying that they're] creating large amounts of crime and threatening the public order," says Jeffrey Hall, a lecturer in international studies at Kanda University of International Studies, in eastern Japan. "They have also been fixated on the idea of foreigners buying property." Days before the vote, the prime minister's administration spoke about the issue too, announcing a new government taskforce to fight "crimes and disorderly conduct" by foreign nationals. His party has also promised a target of "zero illegal foreigners". The Trump admirer who started Sanseito Sanseito, which translates as "Participate in Politics," started in 2020, the year when the Covid-19 pandemic was at its height, and gained prominence with YouTube videos that spread conspiracy theories about vaccinations. Its founder Sohei Kamiya is a former supermarket manager and reservist of the Self-Defence Force (how Japan describes its army). He has credited Trump as an influence for his "bold political style". Reuters He attracted people on social media who were unhappy with conventional parties, gaining support with warnings of a "silent invasion" of immigrants, and pledges for tax cuts and welfare spending. And in 2022, Kamiya was Sanseito's only candidate to be elected into the upper chamber. In a video released on his YouTube channel, Kamiya referred to the "deep state", the idea that the military, police and political groups work secretly to protect particular interests - and rule a country without being elected. "There is a deep state everywhere," he said in the video. "Such as in the media, the medical field, the agricultural field and Kasumigaseki [government agencies]." He also made certain contentious remarks on the campaign trail, which spread on social media. "Once the election campaign cycle started, every media outlet and online forum was talking about 'Sanseito'… and controversial statements or policy positions," says Rintaro Nishimura, an associate at the Asia Group think tank. Kamiya faced backlash after he branded gender equality policies "a mistake" because, in his view, they encouraged women to work and kept them from having children. But he defended his stance. "The phrase 'Japanese First' was meant to express rebuilding Japanese people's livelihoods by resisting globalism," he said in one interview. "I am not saying that we should completely ban foreigners or that every foreigner should get out of Japan. "We were criticised as being xenophobic and discriminatory. The public came to understand that the media was wrong and Sanseito was right." Gusto over policy? Prof Kingston says his success is less about policies and more about gusto. "It wasn't so much the content of the message, but how the message was delivered," he argues. "It's the passion, the emotions and the social media. People [in] their 30s and 40s think, 'We want change… we may not buy into everything he is pedalling, but he can change things and address my concerns'." In addition to the swelling youth base, a large number of the LDP's core conservative voters have also turned to Sanseito because they no longer see the ruling party as right-wing enough. The late former prime minister, Shinzo Abe, represented the far-right of the LDP and that kept voters on board. His successors like Fumio Kishida and now Ishiba represent a more moderate wing of the LDP. "For voters on the far right, they lost their home. They want a more ardent advocate for their positions. And Kamiya is that passionate advocate," Prof Kingston says. Ultimately, it is too early to tell whether this populist trend will endure in Japanese politics, say analysts. Though it may be seen as the refreshing agent of change in politics, it has yet to be put through the wringer of close scrutiny. The governing LDP may be the weary incumbent but it is still a big beast that has weathered many political storms. It remains the most experienced party when it comes to foreign relations; recently, it had to navigate a volatile global order and an unstable Asia-Pacific region. Domestically, the LDP is down but not out. If nothing else, this is because there is currently no alternative considered viable enough. But the far-right's success has hammered home a new reality: voters can no longer be taken for granted. And while Japan historically cherished its stability, a new generation is hungry for change - even if its not yet clear what that looks like. Top image credit: Reuters BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Ohio ex-police officer sentenced to 15 years to life in 2020 killing of Andre Hill
A former Ohio police officer convicted of murder in the shooting of Andre Hill, a Black man who was holding a cellphone and keys when he was killed, was given a mandatory sentence Monday of 15 years to life. Former Columbus officer Adam Coy shot Hill four times in a garage in December 2020, as the country reckoned with a series of police killings of Black men, women and children. He told jurors that he feared for his life because he thought Hill was holding a silver revolver. Coy, who is being treated for Hodgkin lymphoma, told the court Monday he plans to appeal against the verdict. 'I feel my actions were justified,' Coy said. 'I reacted the same way I had in hundreds of training scenarios. I drew and fired my weapon to stop a threat, protect myself and my partner.' Prosecutors said Hill followed police commands and was never a threat to Coy. In victim impact statements Monday, Hill's sisters and ex-wife described the 47-year-old as a gentle man who had never met a stranger. His grandchildren called him 'big daddy'. Police body camera footage showed Hill coming out of the garage of a friend's house holding up a cellphone in his left hand, his right hand not visible, seconds before he was fatally shot. Almost 10 minutes passed before officers at the scene rendered aid. Coy, who was fired afterward, had a lengthy history of citizen complaints, although most were declared unfounded. Weeks later, the mayor forced out the police chief after a series of fatal police shootings of Black people. Columbus later reached a $10m settlement with Hill's family, and the city passed a law requiring police to give immediate medical attention to injured suspects.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on the legacies of slavery: the response to Edinburgh's report must go beyond academia
The British campaign against slavery and the slave trade has long been recognised as an inspiration for later social movements. But for centuries, the brutality inflicted on the millions of African people who were bought and sold into chattel slavery in British colonies was either veiled from view or treated as a sin that was expunged when it was abolished. New research from the University of Edinburgh, about its history of involvement in slavery and the slave trade, is part of a belated reckoning by UK institutions with this disturbing aspect of their past. Another Scottish university, Glasgow, was among the first to embark on such a process. In response to evidence about substantial gifts from plantation owners and slave traders, it partnered with the University of the West Indies on a reparative justice programme in 2019. Edinburgh's report highlights a minimum of £30m in funds raised, over the years, from numerous donors with links to slavery, and points to the university's historic role as a 'haven' for racist thinkers, some of them prominent advocates of the pseudoscience of phrenology. It also criticises the university for being less active in the abolitionist movement than others. Recommendations, to which the university is weighing its response, include the establishment of a new racism and colonialism study centre, the renaming of buildings, and efforts to diversify the university's staff and student body, with a particular focus on the low number of Black students and academics. But as well as new policies and financial decisions such as the creation of new scholarships or a summer school, the research demands a reaction beyond the institution itself. The University of Edinburgh has a prominent role in the life of the Scottish capital, with Gordon Brown and John Swinney among its alumni. Steps to address injustices within academia, which are part of the legacy of slavery, are important. But the point of such investigations goes beyond this. As well as prompting internal changes, the report should promote stronger public understanding of the ways in which present-day unfairness is rooted in the abusive practices and ideologies of the past. For too long, the myriad ways in which our modern world was shaped by grossly unequal colonial-era relations were glossed over as historians focused on other topics – often those which showed Britain in a favourable light. But the truth is that traces of the exploitative dynamics of previous centuries are all around us: in our global financial system; in the landscapes and built environments of former imperial powers and the countries they colonised; in museum collections; and in the histories of organisations such as the Guardian, which examined its own links to slavery in the Cotton Capital project. Institutions with centuries of power and influence behind them, and endowments of obscure provenance, have a responsibility to be open that some have started to recognise. Universities such as Edinburgh cannot, in good conscience, continue to trade on past achievements unless they are also honest about the parts of their past that provoke anger and regret. But reflecting on historical events, while necessary, is not sufficient. As this report makes clear, the challenge for organisations that benefited directly from slavery, and colonial-era exploitation more broadly, is to ensure that their actions in the present are guided by awareness of the past.
