 The first thing is that it's a part of creating a record as to what exactly transpired and the committee has gone into, very deeply, into the various incidents, the build-up up to the aftermath and the various issues, various other issues. So this document is a historical document in the sense that five years or ten years ahead, people should know what really transpired during the riots in 2020. So this is one of the, secondly, there is a need to, there is a narrative by this particular government and that where the anti-CA protesters are branded as rioters or the jihadis etc. So that kind of a narrative where there is a spreading hate all the time, maybe for electoral gains or for some other gains. So we must have another narrative and there is a constitutional narrative and that is the, that is what the, so this is a committee of some former judges and bureaucrats, we come together and we look into it, it's not, our intention was never to interfere with the court process, but to inquire into, because as citizens we are concerned how this happened in a capital of the, and why it spread over four days and why there was so much loss to human lives. But the goal is justice. Of course, goal is justice, goal is justice, I mean the, whether people would listen to it, whether media will take it up, that's a completely different matter. A discussion on the report, the implications of the report, where we were, where we are now, it is important to bring it before the public. That is the essential purpose of this report because the lessons are not transient, lessons are permanent, they have to be learnt and they have to be acted upon by the public. The sheer fact that what happened is documented because there are efforts to erase history, there are efforts to deny that something like even 2002 happened, forget about the Delhi rights which were at, I mean if we compare it to 2002 they were smaller scale, although the same modus operandi but smaller scale. So when there are efforts all around to erase whatever has happened and especially whatever Sangh Parivaar has done to the, especially to the minorities, there is a need to record to document, even if no one uses it, for the sake of history it is important. In January 2022 the Uttarakhand police arrested him for hate speech against Muslims at a Hindu country in Haridwar in December 2021. In April 2022 the Delhi police in an affidavit to the Supreme Court said that nothing pointed out to calls for genocide being made by speakers, this was the first affidavit of the Delhi police, the court asked them to submit a better affidavit. In May 2022 the Delhi police changed tack and said an FIR was registered against the speakers for hate speech, no action has reportedly been taken against any police officers for this misdirection. You cannot see a difference in the rhetoric of the kind of vile language that is being used by prominent politicians from the BJP or by TV anchors in the studio and that complete match is because this is the thought that has been defined for our times and which has huge public acceptance. This is not a place where this is being imposed on the public, the public is freely participant in this atmosphere of hate that is happening. Is there institutional bias in the police force, in the law enforcement, in the investigating agencies? We have shied away from even examining that proposition, it is something that in the UK was put forward after the killing of Stephen Lawrence by Lord McPherson about what is institutional bias when an entire organisation as a collective works through prejudices etc. So there are models which are helpful in examining a certain situation. There are problems of policing hate speech, just let me put it in proper perspective. See, traits of what gives rise to violence are all around us. Hate and spite have spread widely. What we need now is a collective response. We have created an economic structure in which in a half liberalised economy the owners of the media are at the beck and call of the government because media can only be owned by owners with large amounts of money. That large amount of money does not come from the media, it is a strange fact if we actually look on it that from 1990 onwards any new media organisation that has been launched has not made money. You can look at NDTV, you can look at Outlook, I can name 10 others. Yet new media outfits continue to be opened, why is that the case? Because it's an influence peddling business today. What shapes our understanding cannot be that these police officers, one is of course there is a direct political interference and a political dictat that is given. The second is a matter of institutional bias, particularly against religious minorities, something that has been there against Dalits and other marginalised groups, but something we don't examine as a subject and I would urge that we look through that lens and we would find rather grim concerns that may emerge. The committee was troubled by several questions, such as what drove the violence? And if hate was at the heart of the violence, how did society become so saturated with toxic hate that violence was a natural outcome? It was like bringing a mastic to a powder cake. All this is unfolding before the eyes of the Delhi police. Let us again be honest, do we really expect this police force to be acting? Are we waking up today and asking accountability of a police force, which may I point out that most of the senior officials who were in the police force over the last 10 or 15 years would have been trained and mentored by people who have gone through 84 or have a direct chain of command with the police force that actually tackled the 84 violence against the 6 in Delhi. They have seen that not only do you not suffer, but you actually progress in your career if you are complicit with the political powers that exist. The number of times nowadays that people ask for a special investigating team is actually something that should be just data points should be built on it because there seems to be a general lack of faith in an investigation to be done by the police wherever there is any power in equivalence and here we are talking of a crime in which the state obviously has both an interest and a hand. There was an element of organized violence, but the organizers also found segments of society willing to participate in chaos. Ma'am followed as well mob violence, faceless hordes of people spread out, individuals finding security and courage to be their worst rabbit cells as rioters, arsonists and murderers. If you see the run up to the violence this is what the government wanted to demonize a community through law. The community comes out in peaceful protests largely. You have a police force and a political class that is complicit in the government's demonization and finally the violence has acted out in keeping with the logic of the 2014 elections. The central government did not try to formally engage or respond to serious fears of the Muslim community who were concerned about being disenfranchised by the C.A.N.R.C. courts unfortunately also refused to intervene with Justice Bobde outright saying that this was mob violence and the court would not take it up. Several political leaders made offensive speeches, issued tweets against protesters in campaign BJP in fact announced that mobilizing people in support of the C.A.N.R.C. was a key party agenda. Now in the report we have discussed we are in fact reproduced some of the speeches starting from Mr. Anupam the then president and the of the BJP Delhi unit and to Yogi Adityanand, Kapil Mishra and everybody. So the election commission had a crucial role in preventing election from becoming platforms for the spread and mobilization of hateful content but we found that the commission issued gag orders only in some cases of hate speech and never ordered, never ordered, that's very important, registration of FIRs. Remember that this is the capital city of the country that if something like this can happen in Delhi it can happen anywhere and I believe that moment was very very important because you know the entire emergence that you see of genocide, public calling out of genocide and so on started there. You had these important BJP functionaries shouting for people to kill you know. So that moment is a very important moment and we need to understand what it's about. There are some people who will not like to remember it but there are people who feel concerned and all those who feel concerned that something like this shouldn't happen shouldn't be repeated ever again. So those people have to really remember it and I'm sure it's not something very pleasant to remember but there are painful things also which need to be part of your memory and need to be commemorated at least all those who suffered. This is important to ensure that some of us are coming out again, none of us are coming out again. Are we out there on the streets? We are not. In this chilling effect we are not coming out. This is one tiny step. I don't know it needs to become a rush. We need to be out on the streets again. We need to be telling this Sarkar not in our name. I have always said that our DNA is the same. The colour of my blood is the same as yours. My forefathers were born here, I was born here, I will die here, I will be buried here and therefore I see no difference between you and me and to that end if we can carry that message to all across the city as indeed India it will be a big thing.