The BJP on Monday raised the Ishrat Jahan issue in Lok Sabha, accusing a former home minister in the UPA regime of playing with national security by seeking to dub a terrorist as a martyr.
The BJP on Monday raised the Ishrat Jahan issue in Lok Sabha, accusing a former home minister in the UPA regime of playing with national security by seeking to dub a terrorist as a martyr.
Raising the issue during Zero Hour, BJP MP Kirit Somaiya sought to know whether an official committee which probed the disappearance of four documents related to the Ishrat Jahan case, has submitted its report. He alleged that the former home minister had dubbed Ishrat as a terrorist in the first affidavit but changed it in the second affidavit. Mr Somaiya also took the name of another home minister in the UPA tenure. But Speaker Sumitra Mahajan disallowed the names to be taken in the House. Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge took a dig at the Government wondering how the issue could be allowed to be raised as the matter, like Uttarakhand President’s Rule issue, is sub-judice.
Ms Mahajan remarked that the BJP member has only raised a question. Meanwhile, facing fire from BJP for alleged “flip-flop” on Ishrat Jahan case, former home minister P. Chidambaram retaliated during the day by saying that the affidavit controversy is only to “divert attention” from the real issue, which is whether it was a “fake” encounter or not.
Mr Chidamabaram said on Twitter, “the affidavit controversy is only to divert attention from the real issue in the Ishrat Jahan case. Real issue is whether there was fake encounter & whether four people already in custody were killed in that fake encounter.” Regarding the controversy surrounding the change in affidavits done during his tenure, the senior Congress leader said, “Coming to the affidavits, the home minister does not sign affidavits. It is signed by an under-secretary.” He further said in the tweets, “although I have no recollection of seeing the first affidavit, let us presume that I did. Then came the report of magistrate S.P. Tamang. This report caused an uproar and there was demand mainly from Gujarat that Government of India... Should clarify or dispel misinterpretation being placed on the first affidavit. This is why a second, short affidavit was filed!”
