Ritual of inquiry

Commissions set up in the aftermath of tragedies rarely bring about reform

- KANU SARDA

This is how the story goes: a major tragedy happens, television headlines flash, condolence messages pour in, an inquiry commission is set up and a retired judge is asked to head it. But what follows is often less visible. The report languishes, recommendations are not implemented, victims' families wait and the cycle repeats.

On September 27, a stampede at a political rally organised by actor-politician Vijay's Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam in Tamil Nadu's Karur killed at least 41 people. Massive overcrowding and poor crowd control were blamed. Immediately, the state government set up a one-member inquiry commission headed by retired High Court judge Justice Aruna Jagadeesan, and announced ₹10 lakh to the families of those killed and ₹1 lakh each for the injured. Days later, the Supreme Court ordered a CBI investigation, expressing reservations over the Madras High Court's decision to take suo motu cognisance and order a probe by a special investigation team.

Yet, the central question remains: will the commission's report ever be published in full? Will its findings be implemented? Will accountability follow? If history is any guide, the answer is often no, or not fully.

Once a commission is announced, several problems appear. Reports take months or years. The Liberhan Commission, set up following the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid, took 17 years to submit its report. By then, several key witnesses had died or retired, and the political context had changed entirely.