PRESS

AYODHYA TRIAL

MUNSIF, IN ITS editorial on April 20, writes: “While delivering the order to restore the allegations against the real accused (leading figures of the BJP) of hatching a criminal conspiracy for the demolition of the Babri masjid, the Supreme Court has reassured not only the 25 crore Muslims of the country but also the many millions of secular Indians that justice still prevails in the courts... There were many who shed crocodile tears following the Babri masjid episode. The promise of the then-pm to rebuild the mosque at the same site has yet to be fulfilled and there is no hope of that now. Meanwhile, the direction of the cases against the culprits kept on changing and the subordinate court gave clean chits to those actually responsible. But ultimately the truth has to be victorious.”

Siasat (April 21) observes that “the CBI is responsible for the long delay... the Supreme Court has blamed the Central agency for this 25-year delay. The SC has also closed all avenues for escape for the accused and the investigative agencies by its historic order.”

According to Jamaat-e-islami’s bi-weekly, Daawat (April 25), the BJP is trying to derive political benefit from the entire matter. The daily Jadeed Khabar, in its commentary on April 23, writes: “When there is a final judgement of this case of criminal conspiracy after two years (2019), the chessboard for the general elections will be set... the BJP would contest the election on the Ram temple issue.”

KASHMIR’S AGONY

ROZNAMA KHABREIN, ON April 21, writes: “The PDP and BJP had formed a government in an alliance to soothe the wounds of Kashmir. It seemed that the simmering situation would improve and the gulf between the government and the people would narrow. People’s aspirations were addressed in the common programme drawn up. But now everything has changed. Restlessness and agony are being seen among Kashmiri youth. The government’s approach to the situation in Kashmir is not clear... The neighbouring country would derive more and more advantage as the situation worsens in Kashmir. It is to be seen what steps the Centre takes to control the situation.”

Rashtriya Sahara, in its editorial on April 25, writes: “While the condition in the Valley does not reflect confidence among the people, what will the harassment of Kashmiri students in some educational institutions lead to? And how will it be helpful in resolving the Kashmir issue? PM Modi has appealed for ensuring the security of Kashmiri students in different parts of the country. But this would be possible only if the state governments, including those governed by the party in power at the Centre, do not display apathy in fulfilling their responsibilities.”

AZAAN AND BIAS

THERE HAS BEEN considerable resentment at playback singer Sonu Nigam’s tweets on the use of loudspeakers for early morning azaan in mosques. Shakeel Shamsi, editor of Inquilab, in his signed column on April 23, writes: “Was the objective of Sonu Nigam’s tweet not to inflict injury on the sentiments of Muslims? Otherwise, one must think: How can something done with the permission of the Indian government be termed goondagardi? Sonu Nigam should tell us which religious community or sect in India does not use loudspeakers at its place of worship? The media targeted Muslims instead of targeting Sonu Nigam. And the matter was worsened by those mullahs who are obsessed with giving statements before the media. They deliberately helped create a storm... If Nigam had opposed use of loudspeakers at all places of worship in a civilised manner, no Muslim would have possibly said anything.”

Scholar of Islamic law, Taher Mahmood, in Rashtriya Sahara (April 24) writes: “Even a good, simple and truthful statement, if made in an uncivilised manner, can create a storm... The gentleman (Nigam) used extremely wrong words for a simple expression of views... We are not in favour of loudspeakers in places of worship of any religious community and do not consider legal restrictions in such a matter as an interference... But if such a tradition has to be discontinued for reducing noise pollution, the national mindset resulting in indiscriminate use of horns by motor vehicles has to be changed first... Meanwhile, mobile phones can be used for azaan alerts.”

Mahmood cites three court cases (starting from 1956) on the issue of the use of loudspeakers (a) in a mosque and (b) in some Hindu places of worship (both in West Bengal) and (c) in a church in Tamil Nadu. The West Bengal High Court (in the first two cases) as well as the Supreme Court (in the third case) gave judgements applicable to all religions, disallowing the use of loudspeakers based entirely on the reason of noise pollution and in an unbiased and non-discriminatory manner.

Compiled by Seema Chishti