 |
||
|
||
|
||
Author:
Publication: Hindu Vivek Kendra
Date: June 8, 2007.
Note from the Hindu Vivek Kendra:
The first editorial was written immediately after the ban on the RSS, the VHP and Bajrang Dal, after the destruction of the Babri structure on December 6, 1992. The second was written after the lifting of the ban on the RSS and the Bajrang Dal. It would seem that the editor, while writing the second editorial, did not bother to find out what was written in the first editorial. In the first editorial, the editor writes: "The time taken by the Centre to impose it was evidently not the result of feet-dragging, as was initially suspected, but of the need to plug any legal loopholes." In the second editorial, the editor writes: "Admittedly the ban on these organizations was a knee-jerk response of a panicky government that suddenly found itself confronted itself confronted with the enormity of its political miscalculations." Also, the homilies that the editor of the publication (in the second editorial) is so graciously bestowing on the government of the day should also have been given to its own team of reporters and analysts. And it is something that it should be listening to even now on various issues relating to the nation.
Namaste.
Ashok Chowgule
====================================
Title: Means to an end
Author: Editorial
Publication: The Times of India
Date: December 12, 1992
Given the communal frenzy in which the country finds itself, it was inevitable that the arrests of some of the leaders of the sangh parivar would be followed by the ban on communal organisations. The time taken by the Centre to impose it was evidently not the result of feet-dragging, as was initially suspected, but of the need to plug any legal loopholes. Although arrests and bans militate against the country's democratic tradition, there was apparently no alternative in the present instance because of the threats to political order posed by organisations like the RSS the VHP, the Bajrang Dal and the Islamic Sevak Sangh. The Jamaat-e-Islami's fundamentalist policies also meant that it could not escape the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act at a time when some of the worst rioting since partition is taking place all over the country. The need to take such a stern step was also necessary to restore confidence among the people, especially, when the Centre had palpably failed to prevent Sunday's vandalism in Ayodhya, a grievous lapse regardless of attenuating circumstances. Now that the authority, of the state has come down so heavily on those responsible for lighting the communal fuse, the message has gone out loud and clear that the Centre will leave no stone unturned to ensure that nobody can hold the country to ransom.
It has to be remembered that the latest steps are only the means to an end. It is necessary to use this opportunity to reaffirm the parameters within which the political parties and their allied organisations will have to function. The Prime Minister's television interview gave some indications in this regard for, as he said, the "country will go to pieces if we leave the path of secularism." The arrests and the bans are meant only to emphasise the point that no one will be allowed to defy the constitutional order. The corollary to this is that there must also be faith in that order, a commitment which the All-India Babri Masjid Action Committee has violated by its outrageous decision to seek U.N. intervention in the Ayodhya dispute. It is clear enough that implementing the prohibitory orders will not be easy in such an atmosphere of defiance and lack of faith. The Centre may also face additional problems in the BJP-ruled states. Even otherwise, the enormous difficulties of enforcing the ban should not be overlooked, especially where organisations with an extensive network (and also currently in an upbeat mood) are involved. Notwithstanding such difficulties, the latest measures are at least likely to ensure that mischief-mongers will be aware of the risks they now run.
====================================
Title: Yet Another Rebuff
Author: Editorial
Publication: The Times of India
Date: June 7, 2007
In quashing the ban on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Bajrang Dal, the P K. Bahri' tribunal has made the Narasimha Rao government eat crow. The rebuff is no way mitigated by the tribunal's decision to uphold the ban on the Vishwa Hindu Parished. In fact the Allahabad High Court recently ruled against the ban imposed on the RSS after the demolition of the Babri mosque at Ayodhva on Dmember 6, 1992. Since that ruling had already exposed the Union government's shoddy homework, the tribunal's final verdict was a foregone conclusion. Admittedly the ban on these organizations was a knee-jerk response of a panicky government that suddenly found itself confronted itself confronted with the enormity of its political miscalculations. Developments within the ruling party also dictated that the prime minister be seen as doing something firm and decisive against the RSS-VHP-BJP combine. But once that moment passed, the sense of urgency too dissipated, so much so that there were indications that the government did not have its heart it arguing its case before the tribunal. It will be now entirely graceless for the government to appeal against the tribunal's verdict even if the Supreme Court is inclined to entertain such a request. Not unexpectedly, the verdict is being hailed as both a legal and moral victory, for the Hindutva movement. A re-charged BJP has already demanded that its dismissed governments in at least three states be reinstated, even before the Supreme Court has a chance to pronounce on the legality of the dismissal of its ministries in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh.
The Bahri tribunal's verdict is in essence yet another rebuff to leaders who believe that political battles can be won by taking recourse to administrative fiats and legal short-cuts. In recent times the government had deliberately sought to use the judiciary to get the better of its Ayodhya protagonists, without giving much thought to the damage that such involvement in bitter and intractable religious disputes would do to the judiciary's efficacy and legitimacy. This too-clever-by-half strategy resulted in the tragedy of December 6. The latest humiliation of the Congress can be turned to some advantage only if the ruling party learns that its sundry leaders cannot wantonly prod one another to misuse constitutional powers while setting internal disputes. The tribunal's verdict should now restore the Ayodhya dispute to the political arena where it rightly belongs. At the same time the tribunal's ruling on the correctness of the ban on the VHP is a warning to those like Sadhvi Ritambhara who are disinclined to accept moderation and restraint in their public pronouncements. Excesses of one kind will inevitably invite excesses of another kind.
|
||
|
||
|
||