In a few days, the Allahabad High Court will deliver its verdict on the "disputed site" in Ayodhya where the Babri Masjid was felled by Hindoo mobs almost two decades ago, resulting in communal carnage.
Kalyan Singh of the BJP was then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh (UP) - and he has just visited Ayodhya to re-ignite old passions. The good news is that the people yawned and turned away. This report concludes thus:
As he hopped from one temple to another, his small band of supporters tried to energise the local shopkeepers and bystanders with "Jai Sri Ram" and "Mandir yahin banayenge" slogans, but they got no response. "Because of so much security today, our business is down and pilgrims are staying away from temples, said Akhilesh Yadav, a sweetshop owner. "He has already done enough damage to Ayodhya in 1992. Why is he trying to create trouble now?"
What should be done about the disputed site in Ayodhya? In 2003, in a leader article in the Times of India, which is available here, I had opined that the site should be auctioned. I had then written:
There is no clear title to the site; there are various claimants, each possessed of little legitimacy; therefore, the site must be auctioned.
Today, I would like to add a few riders to this.
First and foremost - are the BJP / RSS the only "representatives" of the Hindu community? As the story above of Rajnath Singh's recent visit to Ayodhya indicates, the BJP seeks POWER by POLITICIZING the issue. This is power over public budgets. This is power over transfers and posting of the bureaucracy. This is power over licensing. This is actually what they want. Ayodhya is just their excuse. So, if there was an auction, in my opinion today, the BJP / RSS should NOT be allowed to bid for the site. Indeed, their leaders in 1992 should be prosecuted for arson.
Second - what about the citizens of the town of Ayodhya? We never seem to give them a thought. Ayodhya is a town that gains from pilgrims - who are very scarce today because of all the security hassles. If any decision is to be made on the disputed site in Ayodhya, I believe that the citizens of this town must be heard. It is they who have to literally "live" with the decision.
Since I wrote that article in 2003, India has seen the phenomenon of Narendra Modi - and I have made a drastic re-assessment of the BJP. Between the CONgress and the BJP, there is only black and a darker shade of black. Not much of a choice in this socialist democracy.
A thoroughly reformed man today, I think it would be best if the disputed site was converted into a monument for communal peace and harmony, a monument to the gods of all faiths, a memorial to all those killed in communal conflagrations. Let us seek the blessings of all the gods of all faiths - and let us de-politicize the issue, thereby nullifying the BJP.
i thought you would look at the issue purely from the property rights point of view.
ReplyDeletein the absence of titles, the property belonged to the masjid. not withstanding some 150 year old counter claim by another party or material (ram idol) that was allowed to be placed within the premises.
if the court doesn't find any value in the counter claims by RJB nyas, property rights should rest with the masjid committee.
land should be handed over to the masjid committee and govt should pay some money as compensation to be used in the reconstruction of the masjid.
Here is one thought: Since the Indian government has failed to bring about a reconciliation, how about a referendum? Let the government organise a vote on the issue and let the people decide whether they want a Mandir or a Masjid or a monument or something else. After all we are a democracy and a referendum is a democratic method.
ReplyDeletei dont think we should give the referendum thought too much weight. we should have rule of law and not rule by ballot or majority. thats just one step away from mobocracy
ReplyDelete