India's Supreme Court Bans 'Bulldozer Justice,' Leaving Many with Unanswered Questions

The recent ruling by India's Supreme Court against “bulldozer justice” — the practice of demolishing homes of those accused of crimes — raises concerns for families who have already lost their homes, as no measures for compensation were established in the order. Activists continue to advocate for justice as many like Afreen Fatima, whose home was demolished in 2022 following her father's arrest, struggle to rebuild their lives without support.

In an emphatically shifting legal landscape, India's Supreme Court has recently outlawed the controversial practice known as “bulldozer justice,” where authorities have been permitted to raze the homes of individuals accused of crimes, particularly targeting marginalized communities. Afreen Fatima, an activist based in Prayagraj, represents the emotional toll of this policy, as she recounts the heartbreak of watching her childhood abode, a two-storey yellow-brick house, torn down in the summer of 2022 following her father’s arrest for alleged involvement in a violent protest. Despite his claims of innocence, the damage was already done to their family’s home.

While the court's ruling has been widely heralded as a victory against the arbitrary misuse of power, Fatima's situation underscores a glaring omission: the lack of provisions for compensation or redress to families who have already lost their homes. “We welcome the judgement, but what about those of us who have already lost our homes?” Ms. Fatima poses, echoing a sentiment shared by many others affected by this draconian practice.

Statistics reveal a troubling trend; in the brief span of three months in 2022, 128 structures were bulldozed across five states, contributing to public outcry regarding the disproportionate targeting of Muslim families amidst accusations of illegal construction. Although the Supreme Court's 95-page order places stringent requirements on authorities to notify occupants of demolitions in advance, victims of past demolitions like Fatima express skepticism over the true implications of the ruling.

“There (have) been no hearings for the families challenging the demolitions in court,” she notes, reflecting the arduous path many affected individuals face while seeking justice that remains just out of reach.

The ruling has prompted responses from legal experts, who point out that victims can still pursue compensation for their losses. However, Ashley, a daily wage worker in Udaipur, describes her own experience of losing her home as particularly devastating, stating, “We are practically on the streets, with nothing and no one.”

As the court's guidelines move forward, there remains a palpable tension in the air amid the lingering hopes of families like Afreen Fatima’s, whose resilience shines through as they strive to reconstruct their lives. Fatima recognizes that her father’s dreams of returning to their old home are intertwined with her own struggles to navigate a new reality devoid of familiar comforts.

The culmination of these events spotlights the broader themes of justice, resilience, and the ongoing quest for accountability in the face of political tumult. In an era defined by change, families aim to reclaim not only their homes but also their dignity and the memories tied to those spaces.