Bulldozer justice: India families still waiting for compensation

” You can be lonely at house, you know”?

That’s how Afreen Fatima, an advocate from the north American city of Prayagraj, finds herself feeling, every now and then.

In the summer of 2022, Ms Fatima’s childhood home – a yellow-brick two-storeyed house in the bustling depths of the city – was torn down by authorities overnight.

The house was demolished after her father, a native lawmaker named Javed Mohammad, was arrested and named as the “key sympathizer” of a protest by Muslims, which had turned violent.

He denies the claims, and has never been found guilty of any crime linked to the June 2022 demonstrations.

The family is only one of many who have experienced “bulldozer justice,” a practice that involves quickly destroying the homes of criminal suspects, and maybe one of the last.

The practice, which has become more popular in recent years, was banned by India’s highest court on Wednesday, particularly in states led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP).

Although the victims are from Hindu families, the BJP claims that the protests are primarily directed at India’s 200 million unexpected Muslims, particularly in the wake of anti-religious protests or other protests.

Numerous state chief officials have attributed this demolition to their strict enforcement of the law. Actually, however, the explanation given is that these buildings were illegally constructed.

Researchers have repeatedly questioned this, arguing that there is no legitimate explanation for it and that using rules intended for another to punish someone for an alleged offense makes no sense.

Ms. Fatima claims that she and her family moved properties half in the area during the 20 times Mr. Mohammad was imprisoned and released on bail earlier this year.

It took some effort, but they ultimately feel settled. However, there are times when their new home feels strangely new to her, she says, like an “adopted room” which has not been lived in plenty.

” It’s not the same. My entire life was spent in our older home. There are no thoughts below, it feels empty”, she says.

Ms. Fatima was hoping for some closure when the judge read out its decision this year.

But the results turned out to be melancholy.

Because the court did not mention any kind of redress for people like Ms. Fatima’s, who have previously been the subjects of such evictions, even though it has outlawed officials from haphazardly razing down homes and businesses of those accused or convicted of crimes.

” We welcome the decision, but what about those of us who have now lost our houses”? she says.

The practice had become commonplace: in 2022, authorities in five states bulldozed 128 structures in just three months “as punishment”, a report by Amnesty international shows.

In its attempt, which ran over 95 pages, the jury came down heavily on the condition governments, saying it may “become a judge and determine that a person accused is innocent and, consequently, condemn him”.

Giving out such punishment “reminds one of a lawless state of affairs, where might was right”, the judgement added.

Following that, the court issued a set of guidelines that mandate that authorities must give at least 15 days ‘ advance notice to the occupant before an illegal structure is torn down and publicly explain the reason for the demolition. According to the judgment, all public officials will also be held personally accountable for violating Indian laws.

Rights groups, lawyers and opposition leaders have hailed the order as a “turning point” in tackling the unfair practice that has gone unchecked for years. “Late is the hour in which these guidelines chose to appear – but better late than never!” said Delhi-based lawyer Gautam Bhatia.

Judge and former high court chief justice Govind Mathur agrees that the order does not mention the victims, but that it “does not restrain any claim of compensation by such persons.”

” If an act is illegal, then the victim can always demand for compensation. He claims that the wrongdoers must still pay the consequences for the wrongdoers.

Justice Mathur goes on to say that the decree sends a” strong message to state machinery to not cooperate with political bosses but to act in accordance with the law.”

Ms Fatima, however, points out that the reality is not that simple.

More than two years have passed since her family first filed a high court case against the demolition. But there has n’t been a single hearing, she says.

She still remembers the day it all happened. The excavator sat in a corner of their homes as spectators watched it fall. Many of them housed phones and cameras. Ms Fatima, who watched the demolition on her own phone from a relative’s house, remembers going numb.

She considered her room and the sheer volume of items it had in storage. Stories were spread all over, including priceless everyday memories like the lively family discussions over the dinner table and the time she spent with her sister. ” All of that was gone”, she says.

While Ms Fatima’s family was able to rebuild their lives in some capacity, others say they are still stuck in limbo.

“We are practically on the streets, with nothing and no one,” says Reshma, a daily wage worker in Rajasthan state. In September, Reshma’s house in Udaipur city was demolished on grounds of illegal encroachment, a day after her eight-year-old brother allegedly stabbed his classmate.

While his father was detained on suspicion of abetment to murder, the child was taken into custody and transported to a juvenile home. Reshma, her mother, and sister have all been residing in tiny dorms along the city’s edges ever since.

To them, the court ruling is meaningless, she says. ” We want actual help, some money or compensation to rebuild our lives, this changes nothing”.

Like Ms Fatima, Reshma’s family has also challenged the demolition in court. According to legal experts, the Supreme Court’s recommendations have the potential to influence how all such pending cases will be heard in the future.

“This decision will change many things – courts will have to see whether legal processes were followed while carrying out these demolitions,” senior Supreme Court lawyer CU Singh told BBC Hindi.

Ms Fatima is not entirely sure whether the court’s order would actually halt the demolitions.

But her father, Mr Mohammad, is brimming with hope, she says.

Sometimes, she catches her father thinking about their old home- the sofas and the rugs, the rows of books on the shelves, which he had painstakingly put together, probably still lying in the rubble.

” He did most of the improvements, from the curtains to the cushion covers. Losing the house broke his heart more than anyone else’s”, she says.

However, Mr. Mohammad is already working to make improvements to his home and his life. He does n’t want to endure the suffering. His daughter says,” He keeps telling me that this is a historic order, and we must talk about it as much as we can.”

” Just like this house, we are building lives again and renovating our memories”.