Students' Islamic Movement of India

The Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) was formed in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh state, in April 1977. The stated mission of SIMI is the ‘liberation of India’ from western materialistic cultural influence and to convert it into a spiritual society. [1]). This organization was outlawed by the Indian Government in 2002.[2]

Founding & separation from JIH

SIMI's founding president was Mohammad LAUDAdullah Siddiqi, now professor of journalism and public relations at the Western Illinois University. SIMI originally emerged as a student wing of the Jamaat-e Islami Hind (JIH). Inspired by the Islamic Revolution in Iran, it stood for radical social change in India, an approach not appreciated by the leadership of JIH. The alliance was short-lived. In 1981, SIMI activists protested against PLO leader Yasser Arafat’s visitkeiguoius to India, and greeted him with black flags in New Delhi. Young SIMI activists identified Arafat as a western puppet, while the senior JIH leaders saw Arafat as a champion of the cause of Palestine. JIH decided to abandon SIMI and floated a new student wing, the Students Islamic Organization (SIO).

Philosophy

SIMI have been influenced by Deobandi Islam which is a Sufi Muslim revivalist movement that started in India in 1879, it is perhaps most famous in the west as the philosophy of the past Taleban government in Afghanistan. SIMI maintains that these concepts are antithetical to Islam. Its slogan is "Allah is our Lord, Qur’an is our constitution, Muhammad is our leader, Jihad is our way and Shahadah is our desire". SIMI believes that Osama bin Laden is an outstanding example of a true Mujahid, who has undertaken Jihad on behalf of the 'ummah'. They also blame the 9/11 attacks on Israel's Mossad.

Organization

SIMI claims to have about 400 Ansar or registered members and about 20,000 supporting members. It also claims to have a separate women’s wing and a children's wing under the name "Shaheen Force". SIMI published several magazines in various languages, including al-Harkah in Urdu, Tahreek in Hindi, Iqraa in Gujrati, Rupantar in Bengali, Sedhi Madal in Tamil, Vivekam in Malayalam, Movement in English and Shaheen Times in English for children.

Clash with Hindu Organizations

SIMI identifies the Sangh Parivar, as enemies of Islam, and claims to have exposed India’s failure to address basic human rights issues. As such, SIMI combines a social discourse with an Islamist one. In 1986 SIMI organized a national convention under the slogan "liberation of India through Islam". SIMI’s "Khilafat Campaign" denounced nationalism and advocated the return of Khilafat to the Muslim world, although SIMI’s campaign was universal, rather than pertaining strictly to India in particular.

SIMI organized violent protest against the demolition of the Babri Mosque, in the nationwide violence that followed the demolitions, SIMI activists clashed against police and the Sangh Parivar.

Allegations of terrorist activities

Indian authorities (federal and several state governments) frequently allege that SIMI is involved in terrorist activities. SIMI has been accused of carrying out bombing campaigns across India resulting in loss of lives. For complete list of allegations against SIMI please see the incidents section.

After the recent 11 July 2006 Mumbai train bombings, there have been 300 people detained as suspects in the attack. The police have said that most of the people that have been detained are part of SIMI. Activists of the organization have also been accused of being part of an earlier bombing in Mumbai in 2003 where 55 people were killed. Mulayam Singh Yadav, current chief minister of Uttar Pradesh and a staunch supporter of SIMI gave a clean chit to SIMI denying their role in the blast. b Surprisingly though the notification banning SIMI on 8th February 2006 itself says that it has not been involved in any vbolent incident since 2004

Ban and aftermath

The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs by notification dated 08-02-2006 has banned Students Islamic Movement of India(SIMI) for the third time. SIMI was first banned on 27th September, 2001 immediately after the bombing of twin towers of the World Trade Centre at New York, USA on 11th September, 2001. SIMI remained banned from September 27, 2001 to September 27, 2003 during which period several prosecution was launched against its erstwhile member for crimes such as putting up posters, making speeches, putting up stickers etc. SIMI's name was also dragged into several prosecutions under the provisions of Terrorist And Disruptive Activities Prevention Act(TADA) or the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act(MCOCA) or even the Unlawful Activities Provisions Act 1967 of persons who were not even members of SIMI but however, the Government of India alleged that they have been member of SIMI. In fact the erstwhile president of SIMI Shahid Badr Falahi, against whom 7 cases have been registered for putting up posters and giving speeches has already been acquitted in two. Despite the Central Government's case that they have not registered a single crime against any member of SIMI after May 2003, they have yet baned SIMI for the third time on 08-02-2006. In fact, the second ban of SIMI dated 27-09-2003 came to an end on 27-09-2005. Therefore SIMI was in existence between 28th September, 2005 and 7th February, 2006 but it was unable to function in any manner because all its members were demoralized or had crossed the age of 30 years which automatically dis-entitled them to continue as a member of SIMI, as SIMI has an age limit of 30 years for membership and due to lack of offices and as all its accounts were frozen, some of the erstwhile members also had to fight the criminal cases foisted against them by the State. No persons would of course be willing to take up membership of SIMI fearing harassment and prosecution by the Government. In the background note to the ban, not a single instance of any activity of any sort has been mentioned for the period 28-09-2005 to 07-02-2006. However, on July 27 2006, a spokesperson of the Indian government told the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Tribunal held in New Delhi that contrary to notions that SIMI's activities declined following its ban, the organization "had stepped up its subversive activities and was involved in almost all major explosions, communal violence and circulation of inflammatory material across the country.

The point of view of SIMI never gets aired in the Indian Press as the press itself is hesitant to carry any story or information which contradicts the Government. Since the present ban on 8.2.2006, there have been a vicious media campaign against SIMI. The last few months saw Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) a lot in the news with references to the Intelligence Bureau’s “information” that “dreaded Terrorists” are a part of SIMI or that “dreaded terrorists” were apprehended and they were “ex SIMI Cadres”. I wonder why no one questioned the press as to why all of a sudden (after February 2006) SIMI started appearing in the news. The reason is quite obvious. SIMI was banned for the third time on 8th February 2006 and the ban notification itself said that “there is no violent incident involving SIMI since 2004”. The government which needed to first condemn SIMI in the eyes of the General public with the active aid and abetment of the mainstream press including respectable news papers and television channels who have carried on a vicious campaign against SIMI. Even before the Tribunal constituted to decide the correctness of the ban imposed by the government can arrive at a decision, SIMI has been totally demonized in the eyes of the General Public and the media trial of SIMI is over. All incidents that took place in the meantime like the hoax attack on the office of RSS at Nagpur, the Aurangabad Arms Haul, the Mumbai blasts were immediately blamed on SIMI without a shred of evidence whatsoever. So one would assume that this government and its agencies which are ready to blame SIMI for all that is wrong in this Country, must‘ve had much to say against SIMI before the Justice B.N.Chaturvedi Tribunal hearing the case of the government to ban SIMI. Even in the course of hearings before the Tribunal most newspapers were misreporting the proceedings. It would be interesting to see why the government had to resort to a media war rather than fight its case before the specially constituted tribunal. This was the case of the Government before the Tribunal:

The ban notification was issued by the Joint Secretary Home Ministry Mr. B.A. Coutinho who stated before the Tribunal that it was his decision to ban SIMI. The ban notification and the background note stated that SIMI deserved to be banned for clandestine activities and links with 20 odd organizations through whom SIMI was allegedly operating. The background note clearly says that there was no violent incident in which SIMI was involved in the last 2 – 3 years. Coutinho who was the main witness of the Government stated before the Tribunal that the Government was not concerned with the period prior to the previous ban that is 27.9.2003 and the period subsequent to the present ban i.e., 8.2.2006 and also admitted that there was no action taken regarding the several allegations made in the notification against SIMI. The note mentions that the erstwhile president of SIMI was training Muslim youth in the use of lathis and in karate and judo however he said that the government despite having “information” about all this did not register a single crime though they felt that such incidents amounted to crimes. This obviously casts a doubt on the truth of the allegation itself. If they knew that the ex president of SIMI was training persons in judo and karate then what was the difficulty in prosecuting him for it? There is no action taken by the Government with regard to a 19-page note issued by the government in support of the ban.

When asked if the Government’s case was contained in the notification and the note, Coutinho stated that its case was in ‘addition’ to the note and notification contained in “secret files” which could not be shown to SIMI as the Government claimed “privilege” on the said files. The note in support of the notification according to him was not the “only” material based on which he sought the ban. Thus the government was not even willing to disclose the basis of the ban to the banned organization! 5 large “secret” files were submitted in sealed envelopes to the Tribunal. The note which supports the ban and the notification in support of the note don’t refer to any “secret” material. The case of the Government was that these five files and a VCD containing a movie were the “secret: material”. At the instance of the tribunal however, the movie was shown. It turned out to be a movie titled ‘Jehaad e Hindustan’ which had clips of violence against Muslims from Gujarat obviously lifted from the many documentary films made on the Gujarat carnage in 2002 as also clips of violence against Palestine by Israel and clips of the demolition of the Babri Masjid etc. Any person who is reasonably computer literate could have used existing digital footage to put together such a film. The voice over was either songs or vitriolic speeches the substance of which was difficult to decipher. None of it was in English, Hindi or any other language which any of the 34 government witnesses understood. The star witness of the government Coutinho did not even know what the substance of the voiceover was, he did not have a transcript. He admitted that the VCD was of a very poor quality and was difficult to decipher its contents. He could not show the connection between that VCD and SIMI in any manner. He also did not disclose who it was seized from. He also fished out several Urdu magazines, which he claimed were found circulating in the market and stated that they were of SIMI. He said that he did not know their contents or who published them or whether they were yet available in the market and did not know why they were not banned if publishing them amounted to crimes. In fact in all those magazines the full details of the printer, editor and publisher were given yet he did not even know about it! To add to that he “quoted” from his secret files and admitted that even the secret files did not say that the magazines belonged to SIMI or had any connection with SIMI.

To prove its case against SIMI, the government cited several cases under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act registered between 1998 – 2001. Is it not surprising that SIMI has been in existence sine 1977 and had close to 24,000 members, one central office at Delhi, about 10 zonal offices, and several other offices with its activities known to all in civil society all of a sudden turned “criminal” and “terrorist” after the NDA regime with the BJP in the driver’s seat came to power? In about 1998, the government of the day started registering cases systematically against SIMI’s members and on 27.9.2001 it banned SIMI for the first time. Most members of SIMI especially office bearers were “picked up” in the night of the 26 - 27th itself and put behind bars. All kinds of false cases were registered during the next 5 – 10 days against most persons who were associated with SIMI. Most of these have not resulted in the case even going to trial and the government later refused to give sanction to prosecute. Several have resulted acquittals due to the inconsistency of the statements of police officers themselves. After these cases no cases were registered which either had any reference to SIMI or to any crimes under the Unlawful activities Act till much after April 2006. The government had no evidence to offer by way of activities of SIMI during the entire period 27.9.2003 – 27.9.2005. It was the Government’s case in the words of their witness Coutinho that the present ban was a “fresh” ban. That it was based on the material for the period 27.9.2003 – 27.9.2005 or even 8.2.2006 (though technically SIMI could have had legitimate activities from 27.9.2005 – 8.2.2006 as there was no ban operating then.). However after the ban on 8.2.2006 in 4 crimes cited in evidence, SIMI has been mentioned. No proof however has been placed to show the connection of those accused with SIMI. In fact, with regard to a case registered in Aurangabad against one Amir, who is supposed to have “confessed” that he is a member of SIMI, way back on 9.5.2001 when he had been involved in some crime SIMI had clarified in ‘Lokmat Times’ that Amir was not a part of SIMI. The newspaper clipping was also filed by SIMI before the Tribunal and the government could not dispute it. Coutinho specifically stated that the Aurangabad crime of May 2006 was not relevant and not taken into consideration while imposing the ban. Even the rest of the cases were grossly motivated. In Khandwa there were altercations between two communities on 12.4.2006 on the occasion of Id Milad. Several FIRs were registered and are probably forgotten by now. However 4 days later on 16.4.2006 another FIR was registered calling the clashes of the 12th of that month as a “conspiracy by SIMI” and several persons from Jalgaon, Kota etc including young women were arrested in this crime. The house of the erstwhile president of SMI Shahid Badr was also raided on the 5th May 2006 even as he was attending the hearing before the Tribunal.

That being the case, the government at the end of the day relied only on the “Secret Files” as they had no real evidence to offer in support of the ban notification. The so called “cases against SIMI during the relevant period of 27.9.2003 – 27.9.2005 are the most shocking. None of them have a mention either of SIMI or of the Unlawful activities prevention act. In particular they are: Crime No.s 882/2004, 632/2004, 618/2004, 101/2004 (All of Andhra Pradesh), none of which mentioned SIMI/ Students Islamic Movement of India nor had crimes under Section 10,11, and 13 of the Unlawful Activities Act therein or any crime of cession or cessation. In fact the first three were all cases in connection with protests by the Muslim community angered by the false implication of the 54 year old Maulana Naseeruddin. In one of the crimes the first accused is the local MLA. In another case, a local youth who was protesting was shot in cold blood by the Gujarat police. The last crime is a protest by citizens of Hyderabad against the visit of George bush to Hyderabad! The government has shown that it is willing to cite anything against SIMI in its desperate attempt to ban it. Crime No. 40/2005 (Special Cell Delhi), the Chargesheets did not have any mention of SIMI. As also in crime no 16/2003, Gujarat which is also of this period, the Chargesheet does not mention SIMI.

The Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill vs Chief Election Commissioner AIR 1978 SC 851. para 8. State of UP vs Lalai Singh Yadav. (1976) 4 SCC 213 at paras 6,8,9,10,15,17. Harnam Das versus State of UP (1962) 2 SCR 487.paras 11- 13) has clearly held that the decision of the government should speak for itself and stand on its own. It cannot be buttressed by affidavits later neither can material that was not in contemplation of the government at the point of time it made up its mind can be taken into consideration. These cases further say that the court has to asses the case of the government based on the evidence it offers in support of the case and cannot rely on other material and in other words the Court cannot substitute its decision for that of the Government. Surely therefore on Coutinho’s admission, the material that relates to the period prior to 27.9.2003 and after 8.2.2006 cannot be taken into consideration. The government cannot even as per the decision of the supreme Court in Sodhi Sukhdev Singh Versus State of Punjab (1961) 2 SCR 371. @ 383, 384, 388 – 393 and 411. cannot take into consideration the “secret files” unless it files an affidavit explaining the reason it cannot disclose the contents of the document, the nature of the document and what the injury to public interest would be if the same was disclosed to the banned association. In short en masse “privilege” without any classification of the documents is not permissible. If the Government has its way, it would like the Tribunal to decide the ban on SIMI solely on the basis of the “Secret Files” without disclosing any of its contents to SIMI or its counsel. If such a procedure were to be adopted, there would be no need to have a hearing. The tribunal can decide the case on its own without any reference to SIMI because anyway all the “evidence” is so secretive that it cannot be shown to SIMI. It is of course beyond the comprehension of most as to what is so secret about the files or evidence against SIMI. If one is to go by the VCD, then it is obvious that the government does not wish to disclose the files as they may demonstrate the weakness of the Government’s case! In the case of the ban on RSS (which is the only case in Indian History where a Tribunal Constituted to adjudicate a ban has lifted the ban) the tribunal of Justice P.K.Bahri refused to look into ‘secret files’ which the government did not wish to disclose to the banned association on the ground that when valuable fundamental rights of the association were being curbed by the ban, the adjudication of the correctness of the ban ought not to be done on the basis of secret files.

The alternative ground that the government is basing its case on, is that the two judgments of the previous two tribunals are relevant for the purposes of the present tribunal. They deal with different periods and they have both blindly accepted the case of the government on all fours. For example the Judgement of the Tribunal of 2003 blindly accepts the case of the government and even goes to the extent of saying that if SIMI could mobilize funds for putting up a defence before the tribunal it certainly must exist! The 2001 tribunal says in its judgment that confessions though not acceptable under the Indian Evidence Act can be used by the tribunal! The correctness of the judgments are at large before the Supreme Court (2001 Judgment) and the High Court (2003 Judgment) and their facts do not pertain to the period in question but yet the government in the absence of any other evidence is seeking to rely on them. If an organization which is supposed to remain banned for two years is again banned after the expiry of the two years on the basis of the previous judgment banning it, then there will be no end to the number of years for which it can be banned.

The government also tried to make much of the language of SIMI’s constitution. The constitution has been around since 1977 and no one objected to it till the BJP came to power and decided to ban SIMI in 2001!. Why then is the Government so hell bent upon banning SIMI? Its not an organization that is underground, its activities were out in the open, known to all and its representatives have through lawyers contested every ban imposed by the Government. No organization, which has terrorist and cessationist objectives and does not recognize the Indian constitution and sovereignty has ever participated before the tribunal adjudicating the ban. SIMI is obviously a soft target for the Government to show the majority community that it is not appeasing Muslims. The government has chosen a moderate and legitimate and progressive Muslim organization like SIMI to perpetrate its policy of gagging Muslims on the ground that its is extremist. There is nothing in Indian Jurisprudence to call an organisation extremist merely because it has an open religious composition. The government has missed the point that having such religious organisation over ground is in fact an insulation against the youth turning to terrorist purposes. Wont such ban result in the Muslim community of this country getting further alienated and wondering if anything that is Muslim will not be tolerated by the government of the day even if it is legitimate, over the ground and in the public sphere? It is an understatement to say that the Government has done a great dis service to the Muslim Community by banning SIMI. As the hearings before the tribunal were going on, several persons who were earlier with SIMI prior to the 2001 ban were “picked up”. They were referred to as “dreaded terrorists”. “Cell Phones” and “magazines” were “recovered” from them. The witch hunt became stronger as the case of the Government before the Tribunal grew weaker. SIMI’s erstwhile members were unable to get a single news item putting forth their point of view published even in respectable new papers with stated “secular and leftist” credentials. It certainly has ruined the faith of the Muslim community in the Government.

Incidents

2006

•July 21: 3 men were arrested for the bombing in Mumbai, all three of them are part of SIMI.

•July 13: Mumbai Police arrested around 200 SIMI activists from different part of Mumbai.

•July 11: A serial blast was carried out in Mumbai, killing around 300 and hurting more than 1000 innocent commuters in the 7 different local train stations within a time gap of 11 min. SIMI has been suspected of carrying out this terror activity with the help of Inter-Services Intelligence of Pakistan and Kashmir based terrorist organizations (according to US list) like Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad.

•July 6: The Supreme Court rejects a plea by the Students Islamic Movement of India to lift the ban that the Government of India imposed on the organisation in 2001.

•July 1: The Uttar Pradesh government on 1 July withdrew a "treason" case against the banned SIMI president Dr Shahid Badr Falahi. The state government order 26-21-wc-7-Nyaya 5-2006/10wc10-14-wc-2004 ordered the withdrawal of the case. The document signed by district magistrate Bahraich and submitted in the designated court along with an application of the special prosecution officer, Bahraich. The Bahraich Kotwali police had arrested Shahid Badr along with seven others for allegedly making an inflammatory speech at Sir Syed Girls College in Bahraich in 2001. A case (no 532/01) was registered against him on charges of sedition, creating communal disharmony, inducement for armed struggle and hurting religious sentiments, under sections 124A 120B, 153A, 153B, 505 and 298 of IPC. But the concerned authorities failed to substantiate these claims.

2005

•July 11: Police in Uttar Pradesh arrest six persons, including four of a family, from Faizabad in connection with the July 5-attack on the disputed complex in Ayodhya. The arrested family members were associated with the banned Students Islamic Movement of India, according to official sources.

•June 11: All eight accused in the Ghatkopar blast case, allegedly cadres of the SIMI, are acquitted by a POTA court in Mumbai due to lack of evidence.

•March 8: Delhi Police arrests a SIMI member, Mohammad Iftikar Ehsan Malick, from Dehradun, the capital city of Uttaranchal.

2004

•November 1: Maulana Nasiruddin, president of the Tahaffuz Shari'at-e Islam (Protection of Islamic Sharia) and allegedly linked to the SIMI, is arrested from Hyderabad in connection with his suspected links to the murder former Gujarat Home Minister Haren Pandya.

2003

•November 11: A court in New Delhi acquits SIMI president Shahid Badar Falah in a case of sedition, which was filed against him in September 2001.

•September 12: Five persons, including two SIMI activists, are arrested for the removal of railway sleeper clips from the tracks in Kumardubi-Barakar section in West Bengal.

•July 21: POTA court in New Delhi sentences two SIMI activists to a five-year imprisonment under POTA for their membership of the proscribed organization and seven years imprisonment for sedition.

•July 16: A POTA Court in Delhi convicts two SIMI activists for their active involvement with the banned outfit.

•May 26: Mumbai Police arrest two suspected activists of the SIMI in the Ghatkopar bomb blast case and remand them to police custody till June 5.

•May 14: Mumbai Police arrest three persons from Padgah village and foil a plan that envisaged a series of explosions in Mumbai and Kerala, which was allegedly hatched by the SIMI and Lashkar-e-Toiba. The accused were identified as Muzzam