HVK Archives: BJP and the Ayodhya Masjid
BJP and the Ayodhya Masjid - The Free Press Journal
M. V. Kamath
()
18 September 1997
Title: BJP and the Ayodhya Masjid
Author: M. V. Kamath
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: September 18, 1997
A designated court has decided to frame charges against 49 people,
including the Shiv Sena leader in Mumbai, BJP President L, K. Advani and
former U. P. Chief Minister Kalyan Singh in cases relating to the
demolition of the so-called Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992.
The Court found their prima facie involvement in the "conspiracies to
demolish the disputed structure". In his 48-page order, the Special Judge
(Ayodhya), J. P. Srivastava observed that the conspiracy commenced in 1990
by the accused persons and ended on December 6, 1992, with the demolition
of the disputed structure. Interestingly - and news stories have not laid
any stress on this - the Court also found prima facie involvement of
Rivindra Nath Srivastava and D. B. Rai, the then District Magistrate and
SSP of Faizabad respectively for conspiracy. dereliction of duty and
failure to discharge official obligation during the demolition of the
structure. All very interesting. They are to be tried under Sections (
153 (A). 295, 295 (A), 505. 201 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The
punishment for promoting enmity between classes in places of worship etc.
is imprisonment for 5 years and fine, or both: for destroying, damaging or
defiling a place of worship or sacred object with intent to insult the
religion of any class of persons, the punishment is imprisonment for two
years, or fine or both for maliciously insulting the religion or the
religious beliefs of any class, the punishment, similarly, is three years
or fine or both. The non-BJP parties, especially the Congress, the
Communists and the Janata Dal are licking their chops already at the
prospect of seeing their foes in jail, presuming, of course, that the Court
will find them all guilty. Nothing would make them happier than seeing the
BJP and VHP leaders comfortably ensconced in Tihar and other hospitable
places. They could crow that the communal forces have been shown their
place at last and hope to get the Muslim vote when the general elections
have been announced. What is most striking about this development is that
it has taken the judicial system five years and eight months after the
demolition to take the initial step leading to a trial. It can, of course,
be argued, that the Court had to examine some 600-odd people and that,
inevitably, took time. True enough. But the timing of the Court's
decision has elements that make one wonder. Once a Court had been
appointed, it had its work laid out and no one can blame it for anything.
But whether the government is wise to pursue the case is something to think
over. It needs to be stressed that this is not just a simple matter of Law
and Order. It has roots deep in the Hindu psyche and it would be
positively dangerous to play with it. This is not just a case of masjid
being demolished. If that were so a judicial decision would be the easiest
to give. This is case in which Hindu hurts over the centuries have to be
taken into account, as well as the fact that the so-called Babri Masjid
itself had been built following the demolition of a temple on the same
site. Evocation of that fact alone could be expected to make a terrific
impact on Hindus throughout the country. In the circumstances, the expected
trial of Messers Advani and others can only he described as ill-conceived
and deeply to be regretted. It can do no good to anybody, least of all to
the Muslim community.
Let us face it: the issue is not one of law and order. It is not even
political, though some may see a political hand in it. It is profoundly
psychological and involves hurts felt for centuries by Hindus. The
so-called Babri Masjid stood for everything that the Hindus had hated for
centuries. Whether it was built on the site of a temple or not - there is
plenty of evidence to show that it was - the masjid should not have been
built in Ayodhya in the first place, just as Muslims would consider it a
sacrilege were a temple to he built in Mecca or Medina. Muslim
insensitivity to this is appalling. The support given to them by our
so-called liberal secularists is even worse. It can only be considered
despicable.
It is a well-known fact that for weeks the Vishwa Hindu Parishad
representatives met with those of the Babri Masjid Action Committee led by,
among others, Syed Shahabuddin to arrive at some kind of settlement. It
would be a great courtesy to the public if the minutes of those meetings
are made available to it. Instead of fighting for a masjid in disuse, if
the Muslim leadership had the greatness and the compassion to concede to
the Hindus their desire - amounting to a right - to build a temple on the
site, the Hindus. in turn, would have willingly and happily helped to
re-locate the masjid elsewhere at their own cost. And what a resounding
victory it would have been for the forces of secularism! Instead. the
Muslim leadership chose the path of confrontation and challenge. And we now
know with what consequences. The persons to he sued are not Advani and
Kalyan Singh but Messers Syed Shahabuddin, Owassi & Company. Not to
mention our pseudo-liberals and others of their ilk who aided and abetted
Shahabuddin and his colleagues in their destructive approach towards Hindu
society.
Consider this: during the cite thousand years of Muslim rule there are
recorded instances of over 3,000 temples being demolished. Forget, for the
nonce, other obscenities perpetrated by Muslim rulers in the name of Islam,
the forcible conversions, the levying of unjust taxes, the slights offered
to Hinduism at every twist and turn and then, and only then, one can
understand the feelings of Hindus towards the Babri Masjid. Muslim
leadership lacked in statesmanship, in elementary decency and in any form
of goodwill towards their fellow citizens amidst whom they have to live and
work. The Babri Masjid need not have been demolished; it could have been
re-located back by sacred brick to another place, glory be to Sri Ram and
Allah and India would have set an example to others on what true secularism
is. Muslims -and their criminal secularist backers, muffed a great, a
marvellous, opportunity. And the Court is now embarking on vet another
adventure; as Christ would have said: Lord, forgive them, for they know not
what they are doing.
An apology from the Islamic leadership to Hindus and Hinduism is eminently
called for. only there is no religious head for the entire Muslim umma or
diaspora as Roman Catholics have in the Pope, to speak authoritatively for
them and on their behalf. One wishes there was a Caliph who could speak for
his religious followers. There is no Caliph and Muslim leadership is
scattered and will not speak for reconciliation. As Syed Shahabuddin once
said: Muslims will not surrender. And that sums up the attitude of Muslims
at large. There will be no apology for past sins. Indeed the very thought
that Muslim invaders and rulers might have sinned would be unacceptable to
present-day Muslim leadership. Arid they will have the blind support of
the so-called liberal secularists. The pity of it, lago, oh, the pity of
it, as Shakespeare put it in the mouth of one of his characters.
The Pope, being a good Christian, has no such constraints. Some months ago
he apologised for what Christian missionaries did to the natives of' Latin
America several hundred years ago! It did not matter to him that the
terror perpetrated by Jesuits in Peru and elsewhere was committed several
centuries ago. And as recently in the third week of August this year, the
Pope once again offered an apology, this time in Paris, for the massacre of
thousands of Protestants in France by French Catholics. "Christians did
this which the Gospel condemns" the Pope said in French during a three-hour
prayer vigil he led on the outskirts of Paris. He was referring to the
slaughter of thousands - in the streets of Paris on St. Bartholomew's Day,
August 24, 1572 - that helped spread a religious war in France and still
casts a shadow over religious discourse there.
Mark the date: August 24, 1572. That would he 425 years ago! The Pope could
well have argued that after all that is ancient history and why not let
bygones by bygones? That is what many Muslims in India and their cowardly
liberal secularist friends are saying when one raises the issue of
demolition of Hindu temples by Muslim invaders and rulers like Aurangazeb,
over the centuries. Let bygones by bygones. That could happen, if only
Muslim leadership shows some remorse, some understanding of the feelings of
Hindus. But that would be expecting too much from them.
But what else did the Pope say in Paris on August 24, 1997? He said;
"Belonging to different religious traditions shouldn't constitute a source
of opposition and tension. One the contrary, our common love of Christ
pushes us relentlessly to seek the path of unity". Hindus and Muslims don't
worship the same God, but they do both worship a God, under whatever name
He is called. Shouldn't that be the basis for some form of unity? Should
evil perpetrated in another time and place still be defended just because
it was perpetrated by one's co-religionists?
The Muslim leadership is unwilling to live in peace with Hindus. Apology
comes hard to it. But consider, this time, the Japanese Prime Minister
Ryutaro Hashimoto during this talks in Beijing with Chinese Premier Li Peng
said that the cabinet of former Japanese Premier Murayama had expressed its
regret over Japan's invasion and colonial rule and the resultant losses and
suffering inflicted on many Asian nations. "This is the official stance of
the Japanese government," said Hashimoto. Only a great people have the
strength to apologise. Petty people take off on an attitude of
confrontation and bloodshed. May the Court have the wisdom to see the Babri
Masjid be spared one more insult in the name of secularism and the
maintenance of Law and Order.
Back
Top
|
