---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Mohammad Basirul Haq Sinha <mohammad_b_haq@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:25 AM
Subject: [bangla-vision] An extra-judicial verdict: Retrospective sanction of 1992 demolition on questionable grounds makes mockery of secularism and rule of law in India
To: bangla vision <
bangla-vision@yahoogroups.com>
Cc:
banglarnari@yahoogroups.com, notun bangladesh <
notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com>
| | | | Online Edition | Editorial | ![]() | An extra-judicial verdict
Retrospective sanction of 1992 demolition on questionable grounds
makes mockery of secularism and rule of law in India THE verdict of the
Lucknow bench of
Allahabad high court on
the Ayodhya dispute, delivered
on Thursday, will be remembered
more for its extra-judicial
impurities than as a citable case
of immaculate jurisprudence.
Immediate impact of the pronouncement
without untoward
fallout, amid hyped fears about
its grave consequences, is perhaps
a more significant development
than the judgement itself.
By and large every section of
public, political and religious
opinion responded with commendable
restraint which if sustained
over the next few weeks
could be a really great achievement.
However, that is a million
dollar question, given the past
record and known tendency of
the extremist fringe to exploit
every possible 'opportunity' of
this kind.
The content, context and wisdom
of the puzzling judicial verdict
lend itself to diverse and
contradictory interpretations.
There has been no dearth of
opinions from hailing it as an
act of 'judicial courage' to condemning
it as a 'panchayat raj
decision'. To a layman, both
seem almost equally convincing.
Indeed, the 10, 000 page judgement
written by the three
judges of the high court is so full
of confusing conclusions that
their individual interpretations
become stretchable all too easily.
For instance, the court was
asked to pronounce on the ownership
of the plot of land at
Ayodhya. Instead of answering
the simple question in clear cut
terms, as judicial verdict is supposed
to do, the judgement in
this case is fraught with ominous
implications. On the one
hand it has ousted the claim of
the Sunni Waqf Board but on
the other it upheld it by awarding
one-third share of the disputed
property to the Board.
Judicially, this position is irreconcilable,
as much as it defies
logic. Similarly, the judgement
holds that the birth place of
Lord Ram is exactly under the
central dome of the destroyed 3-
dome structure (Babri Masjid)
but relies on what is patently
questionable inconclusive finding
of the Archaeological Survey
of India. Yet it is this dubious
part of the judgement that tilts
the balance of not only the ownership
dispute but the entire
gamut of its political and ideological
dimensions. The judgement
looks to be an odd mixture
of facts, mythology and principles.
Perhaps the saving grace lies
in that part of the judgement
which by consensus of all the
three judges says that status
quo will prevail at the disputed
site for next three months and
that leave to appeal against the
verdict is instantly granted to
litigants. Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh's statement
rightly emphasised this point
while counselling patience and
restraint. There is no doubt that
the case will land in the lap of
the Supreme Court of India
sooner than later. Obviously,
the judicial process is yet to be
exhausted in the six decade old
dispute. All that can be said at
this moment is that the last
word has not been said in the
case, mercifully. The Allahabad
high court judgement has created
a piquant political situation
for the central government.
It was the Congress government,
of PV Narasimha Rao, in
New Delhi when the Babri
Masjid was demolished in
December 1992, in gross violation
of rule of law, civilised
behaviour and political propriety.
The demolition marked the
culmination of politically-motivated
communal frenzy. Now
when that act has virtually
been 'santified' by the
Allahabad court verdict there is
again a Congress government at
the centre. Deeper analysis of
the judgement delivered on
Thursday brings out a highly
disturbing feature of Indian
polity. It sanctifies lawlessness
propelled by communal frenzy.
Nobody can deny that the ideological
packaging of LK
Advani's Rath Yatra in the
early 1990s that culminated in
wanton destruction of over 400
year old Babri Masjid was antisecular,
anti-constitutional and
it mocked at rule of law. The
court verdict has virtually justified
the 1992 demolition by
declaring, on questionable findings,
that the birth place of
Lord Ram was indeed where the
Hindu's believed it to be and
that the Babri Masjid had been
built over the site of a demolished
temple. The BJP whose
stalwarts are facing criminal
charges in the demolition case
had every reason to exude satisfaction
beyond their expectation.
Given the propensities of the
Sangh Parivar, it is only a question
of time when they launch a
more determined offensive to 'to
recover' 33, 000 sites of 'demolished
temples' across the country.
Ex-post judicial approval of
the demolition at Ayodhya in
1992 is a boost to the campaign
for 'restoring' temples identified
by the Parivar. The politico-ideological
fallout of the Allahabad
high court judgement is going to
pose toughest challenge to the
Congress party and its government.
The minority community's
faith and confidence in the
ruling party's will as well as
capability to defend secularism
and rule of law is now in more
serious doubt. One Congress
government connived in the
demolition of the Babri Masjid
and another one failed to prevent
the dastardly act from
being sanctified with judicial
approval. Muslim minority has
reason to be more fearful after
the verdict, notwithstanding
restrained initial impact of the
judgement. Triumphalism lies
at the root of the Saffron ideology.
And Muslims have always
been at its receiving end. | | -- MBHS
|
__._,_.___
--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment