The Hurling Shoe: A disgrace to the justice-system we have in our country

The minister - ensconced in his chair, addressing the questions from a group of reporters, posed with an unanswerable question of some sort, denying to answer the same - and there comes a hurling shoe, not on the face of the minister though, but surely on the face of the people, he unfortunately happens to be one of. What the democratic republic of India witnessed on April 7 is no less than a disgrace - not so much to the man who hurled his shoe as much as it was to the justice-system we have in our country.
The year 1984 - October the 31st, the then Prime Minister is shot dead by her Sikh bodyguards. That day and three more to follow - the national capital saw the brutality, ghastlier than which, nothing can ever be imagined. As many as 3000 Sikhs slayed in a period of 4 days; nearly a 1000 killed each day. One thing that I still remain foxed with is the fact that it is the only anti-Sikh riot till date in the history of India, which I think in some sense is indicative of a premeditation of the whole carnage. Agreed, that the PM was a beloved one. But, was she loved by only the Hindus of Delhi? Why weren't the people in other parts (read any other part) of the same nation so much raged by her assassination so as to come out on the streets killing the Sikhs? May be, because there was nobody to plan, organize and lead the riots there.
Surf the internet, browse through the news coverage of those days, read the interviews of the victims, know the cause advocate H.S. Phoolka has stood and fought for, and you'll tend to shed tears on and be agnostic of the justice-system the biggest democracy in the world has. A quarter century since the incident, and not a single person is convicted till date. And they want us to believe that a mob, craving for the blood of thousands of innocent people, went frenzied all by itself. If for a moment I suspend my wisdom and give in to believing that it was the 'mob' responsible for everything, don't we see a complete systemic and policing fiasco in letting it happen the way it did?
25 years is a long time, yet it's the comport, civility, sanity and grace of the people (of the sikh community) that have upheld their belief in the democratic system, procedures and institutions and have prevented them from resorting to anything that's beyond the sane and humane thinking and ways. The ray of hope amidst so much of haze is that the apex judicial authority is yet to decide on the matter. Taking insinuations from few other earlier cases (like the one of Jessica Lal) I still stand assured that justice will be done. What is worrying, however, is the fact that it all has to come to the supreme court for the final just and genuine verdict and that the intentions of even the prime investigating agency and numerous inquiry commissions are prone to obvious (and righteous, I believe) distrust. Government, its agencies and its people have to understand that nothing is above justice, nothing is above truth. Justice delayed is justice denied. Yet, the most promising thing for the India of 21st century is that even delay of 25 years is borne with a lot of (superhuman) courage, poise, patience and strength, and I salute this spirit of civility, to which the society actually owes a lot.
The gentleman, who hurled his shoe, apologized to his act and said with all conviction that it's not something worth idolizing. And not to anybody's surprise, I believe, the whole issue was tried to be moulded towards gaining mass support by enticing public. On the other hand, those playing defensive said the gentleman to be a party to a pre-planned action.
The honorable minister, despite having had the most shameful experience of his life, later condoned the act, and the compulsion for this could be the innocence of the gentleman who could just not help giving in to human emotions. The minister along with his fellow-men in the government, however, must for heaven's sake act before people completely lose their belief in investigations, inquiries, law and justice and resort to acts similar to (in fact, severe than) the one by the gentleman. For then, the people responsible may not even apologize.