Police Conduct during Communal Riots: Evidence from 1992–93 Mumbai Riots and Its Implications

2018 ◽  
pp. 187-207
Author(s):  
Jyoti Punwani
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
pp. 132-177
Author(s):  
Sudha Pai ◽  
Sajjan Kumar

Chapter 3 based on fieldwork in Mau and Gorakhpur provides a rich description of everyday communalism and communal riots in 2005 and 2007, respectively. In Mau, incidents of everyday communalism have a distinct socio-cultural form visible in the confrontation around the Bharat-Milap ceremony. But, fieldwork revealed that the reasons lie in underlying tensions from the desire to protect religio-cultural practices, economic distress due to decline of the weaving industry, heightened political consciousness, and the role of the mafia within the Hindu and Muslim community, which the BJP has been able to exploit and engineer the 2005 riots. In Gorakhpur, communalism has a more distinctly political colour, the result of sustained religion-based mobilization by Yogi Adityanath and his HYV responsible for creating communal polarization, tension, and incidents culminating in the 2007 riots. In both towns a characteristic is mobilization to saffronize the Dalits taking them away from the BSP.


1969 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. T. M. Fernando

In contrast to India, where communal affrays were ordinary incidents of life, there was little inter-communal hostility in Ceylon throughout British rule. The clash between the Sinhalese and the Muslims that occurred in May–June 1915 was the major exception to this general trend of peace and tranquillity2. Not only did the disturbance take the Ceylon government by surprise, it placed the Colonial Office in a quandary. In this paper it is proposed to examine the reactions of the Ceylon government and the Colonial Office to what was an unprecedented disturbance in the ‘senior colony of the new empire’3.


2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 683-706 ◽  
Author(s):  
MUHAMMAD IQBAL CHAWLA

AbstractMountbatten once said, “I sincerely hope that His Majesty's Government will support me should this eventuality arise. But I feel that if we can blot out 10,000 fanatics in the first round we may stop four hundred million people from being involved in war”.1Despite his strong commitment and prompt responses to the communal riots, Mountbatten's inability to prevent the massacres, especially brutal and widespread in the Punjab, and in the rest of the country in general, invited criticism of his role as the last leader of British India. It is important, therefore, to analyze the dynamics of the communal violence in the Punjab and Mountbatten's response to it. This paper attempts to understand Mountbatten's reading of Punjab's communal problem and his efforts to deal with it. It also analyzes the measures he took to curb and eradicate violence which resulted from that. Hence, this study fills an important gap in our existing historical literature and helps in revising prevailing views about Mountbatten's real role in dealing with the communal riots in the Punjab.


2013 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 647-649
Author(s):  
Sara Pursley ◽  
Beth Baron

This issue of IJMES features seven full-length articles and a roundtable on “theorizing violence.” While we were preparing the articles for publication in June and early July, the conflict in Syria was escalating, the Turkish state was suppressing protests in Gezi Park, and the situation in Egypt took a precipitous turn when the military killed more than fifty Muslim Brotherhood supporters. As our colleagues writing in more time-sensitive venues such as Jadaliyya, Facebook, and personal blogs scrambled to keep up with events, we decided to take a broader look at scholarly approaches to the study of violence. For the roundtable, we asked seven political scientists, historians, and anthropologists working on the Middle East and South Asia to reflect on “violence” as a theoretical category across the disciplines. The responses move from introductory reflections on studying, teaching, and writing about violence by our new board member Laleh Khalili, who helped us organize the roundtable, to conceptualizations of violence “from above” employed by colonial, postcolonial, and neoliberal states (Khalili, Daniel Neep), through everyday and crisis-linked forms of sexual violence (Veena Das) and violence “from below,” whether in the forms of communal riots and suicide bombing (Faisal Devji) or self-immolation, hunger strikes, and other acts of self-destruction (Banu Bargu), to reflections on violence and nonviolence in Gezi Park (Yeşim Arat). The roundtable concludes with a broad-sweep analysis of most of the above in relation to (inter)disciplinarity and to Middle Eastern modernity by our board member James McDougall.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document