In 1984, in the aftermath of the assassination of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards, mobs attacked Sikh communities in Delhi and elsewhere in India killing between 3000 and 8000 people with knives, iron bars and kerosene. Despite ten official investigations, several unofficial inquiries, and claims lodged against Indian leaders overseas courts by Sikh activists, very few of the accused instigators and organisers of the attacks have been tried.
This paper evaluates the application of transitional justice practices in the context of the long-running political, military and legal process of bringing an end of Sikh separatism in India. It argues that the focus upon prosecuting the guilty has come at the expense of investment in other forms of justice, notably truth-telling, and the focus on punishment is an oddity in a society generally given to the extensive use of amnesty, even for very serious human rights violations.
