Blow to Advani, but BJP stands to gain from verdict
BLESSING IN DISGUISE The trial — to be completed in two years as per the apex court’s directions — will keep the Hindutva pot boiling, not an undesirable situation for the party It’s (verdict) 24 years late. 2425 years have passed. But at last the Supreme Court has taken the decision that the conspiracy charge should be there.
Supreme Court order restoring criminal conspiracy charges against senior BJP leaders LK Advani, MM Joshi, Uma Bharti and others in the 1992 Ayodhya Babri masjid demolition case might be a blow to them individually, but the party is unlikely to be unduly worried about its political costs.
For one, the trial —to be completed in two years as per the apex court’s directions —will keep the Hindutva pot boiling, not an undesirable situation for a party that blended it with development to win a series of elections over the past three years. If the demolition of the disputed structure in Ayodhya alienated a section of people, including the middle class and liberals, from the BJP, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has brought them back into the party fold with his persona and development narrative.
A demoralised opposition is unlikely to go over the top to attack the BJP on the Ayodhya issue. Rattled by electoral reverses, the Congress has been on the defensive and is making a conscious effort to get rid of the minority appeasement tag the BJP has successfully attached to it.
It was evident from its silence on the controversy over singer Sonu Nigam’s remarks about the use of loudspeakers for azaan (call for prayers from the mosque). Ahmed Patel, political secretary to Congress president Sonia Gandhi, broke this silence on Tuesday, tweeting, “Azaan is an essential ingredient for namaz. In today’s day of modern technology, loudspeakers aren’t.”
As per the opposition party’s assessment, as articulated by senior leader AK Antony at one of the party meetings post-2014 Lok Sabha polls, the perception about the party’s minority appeasement policies had cost it dearly in the elections. His opinion has found many takers in the party. And that explains the zeal with which the Congress has started publicising vice-president Rahul
After some clashes, British administration erected a fence to separate the places of worship. The inner court was to be used by Muslims and the outer court by Hindus. The arrangement didn’t last long as Mahant Raghubar Das filed a suit in 1885 for permission to build a canopy on Ram Chabootra 1990 Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar tried to resolve the dispute through negotiations when VHP volunteers partially damaged the mosque. But the talks failed next year
Nobody knows how much time it will take for the case to settle down. Whoever has made allegations must prove the same. SC’s decision has to be accepted by everyone.
Ten days after the mosque was razed, PM PV Narsimha Rao was instrumental in setting up a commission of inquiry under Justice Liberhan. The panel submitted report on June 30, 2009. Its contents were not made public
Prime Minister AB Vajpayee set up an Ayodhya cell and appointed senior official, Shatrughna Singh, to hold talks with Hindu and Muslim leaders This too could not bear any fruits
The Lucknow bench of Allahabad HC reserved its judgement and advised all parties to solve the issue amicably. But no one was keen and the court said the verdict would be pronounced on September 24
Gandhi’s visits to temples.
With most of the opposition parties on the defensive on Hindutva and wary of raising issues that could be used by their political rivals to project them as antiHindu, the BJP can only gain from a public discourse on the Ayodhya issue, which is likely to continue for the next two years, leading to the Lok Sabha polls in 2019.
Whatever might be the court verdict after the completion of the trial, the BJP is likely to only gain. If the charges against BJP leaders are proved true, many
A plea for an out-of-court settlement reached Supreme Court. But the court rejected it and subsequently gave nod to the Allahabad HC to deliver the judgement. The high court chose September 30 as verdict day
Mohammad Hashim Ansari, the oldest litigant from Muslim side, met Akhara Parishad president, Mahant Gyan Das, to discuss a new proposal for resolution which they planned to put before the Supreme Court. The formula for settlement that talked about the 70 acres of disputed site accommodating both mosque and temple could not take off.
might be tempted to see in it a validation of the party’s Hindutva credentials. But if they are absolved by the court, the saffron party would project it as vindication of its innocence and berate the opposition parties for seeking to malign its secular credentials.
In the immediate context though, the BJP and Narendra Modi will have to take some tough calls, which are rather administrative in nature. The Prime Minister has to decide whether he wants to retain a minister, Hindutva mascot Uma Bharti, who will be facing a court trial.
Another attempt to negotiate started when the litigants from both the parties met in Ayodhya. Swami Chakrapani president of All India Hindu Mahasabha, the main litigant from Hindu side, met the Muslimlitigants fighting the case. From the Muslim side, the oldest litigant of Babri Masjid case, Mohammad Hashim Ansari, his son and his legal representative were present.
The PM talks a lot and extols about morality. He should put his morality to test after this verdict. We leave it to the Prime Minister’s conscience on how he reacts morally to this extensive judgment of the Supreme Court
Leaders from Hindu and Muslim sides met again. Mahant Narendra Giri, president of All India Akhara Parishad, met Hashim Ansari, the oldest surviving litigant in the case. He passed away a month later. Finance minister Arun Jaitley ruled it out Wednesday afternoon, indicating the government’s intent to brazen it out. Another question confronting the PM and the ruling party concerns the propriety of keeping Kalyan Singh in the Jaipur Raj Bhawan. The Supreme Court has said that since he enjoys immunity in his capacity as Governor, charges would be framed against him once he demits office. Modi has put a high premium on morality in public life and he might be in a dilemma over his next course of action.