A tragedy in the making

History seldom repeats itself. But it looks like it is going to do so at Ayodhya. Fundamentalists are once again on the prowl, this time to recruit 10 lakh ‘Ram sewaks’ to build the temple. The last time they had assembled in their thousands was to destroy the Babri Masjid. The instigators are the same: leaders of the RSS parivar’s Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). They haughtily proclaimed then that they had done it. Today they say, come what may they will start constructing the temple after March 12.

I covered the Masjid demolition. The only difference between then and now is the change at the Centre. At that time, it was a Congress government, led by P.V. Narasimha Rao. Today, it is the BJP that heads the government under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. New Delhi is as firm against the construction now as it was before the destruction. Warnings administered today are no different from the ones of those days. Even the words used are the same. The UP government was run by the BJP at that time. The same party ruled the state when the present campaign reached a crescendo.

It is well known that the Centre, even if it did not connive in the demolition, was complacent. Rao’s defence that he was let down by the BJP government is weak because a makeshift temple came up at the place where the masjid once stood after the imposition of President’s rule. Rao did precious little to live up to his promise made before senior journalists that the temple would not be there for long.

The position of the Vajpayee government is a bit ticklish. Some of its ministers are facing the charge of being involved in the demolition before the court. An estranged close family member of Home minister L.K. Advani has filed an affidavit with the Liberhan Commission probing the demolition, making the allegation of complicity against him. What will come out of the affidavit when the commission deals with it is difficult to say. But it is certainly one more point of embarrassment for the government.

Vajpayee is categorical that the dispute can be settled either through an agreement between the two communities or a judicial verdict. But the BJP’s own agenda, although on hold as long as it is part of the NDA, is no different from that of the VHP. The BJP, too, wants the disputed site to be handed over for the building of the temple. Party president Jana Krishnamurthi admitted at a recent press conference that the ‘‘biggest restriction’’ was that the temple was not on the NDA agenda.

How does all this fit into Vajpayee’s stand? True, the PM has rejected the demand for handing over the 67-acre acquired land to the VHP. But referring the matter to the Law ministry to examine its legal aspects is a concession. It indicates the pressure being exerted behind the scenes.

The disputed site is the sanctum sanctorum, the core of the temple. How can the adjoining land serve the VHP’s purpose? It is a ruse, meant to bulldose the process. First start building on the acquired land. Put up gates, pillars and other appurtenances. Then forcing the rest will be easier. Suppose the court declares the disputed site as the masjid’s property. Will the VHP then allow the mosque to be rebuilt? Fearing a possible adverse judicial verdict, its international president Ashok Singhal has said that ‘‘faith was not justiciable’’ and that the VHP was not prepared to abide by any court decision. This negates the very rule of law, the pillar on which the edifice of Indian polity stands. If the faith of a community is above the court’s authority, then why have a constitution at all? And does it mean the faith of every community? In fact, it is wrong on the part of the government to even talk to a body which says it will not obey the judicial verdict if it goes against it.

When the land acquisition case came up before the Supreme Court in 1993, Justice S.P. Bharucha, currently the Chief Justice of India, rightly said in his dissenting judgement that the acquisition would ‘‘favour one religion against another’’ and was ‘‘opposed to secularism’’. Another judge from the minority community, Justice A.M. Ahmedia, who latter became the Chief Justice of India, concurred with him. Even though the majority judgement (3-2) upheld the acquisition by the Union government, it does not follow that the acquired land can be handed over to the VHP.

The government’s legal status is that of a receiver. It keeps the land till there is a settlement or a judicial verdict. The government cannot act on its own and give the land to one party or the other. The Law ministry can either state that the Supreme Court has asked the government to preserve the status quo or refer it to the Supreme Court through the President for advice. The rest will be politics. Whatever the exercise, the Sangh parivar, including the BJP, is playing with fire. Should it be doing so when the country is passing through a critical period because of a war-like situation on the borders? The timing itself reveals the real motive (Vajpayee reportedly sent Defence Minister George Fernandes last week to the Shankaracharya of Kanchi to request him to have the date extended.)

The BJP president refused to reveal the stand the party would take if the construction of the temple began after March 12. His reply was: ‘‘We will cross the bridge when we come to it.’’ This does not discourage the VHP in any way. The government cannot let the matter rest at that. Rao took no precautions. The result was that the masjid was demolished. A similar lassitude can serve as a signal for the VHP to begin temple construction. If that happens, it would be a second disaster for our pluralistic society.

Vajpayee appears to be helpless as has been seen on several occasions earlier. The NDA partners, most of whom are today opposed to the VHP’s move, must press the government to take early action so as to stall the recruitment of ‘Ram sewaks’. The rath yatra the VHP is contemplating will foul the atmosphere. We saw how Advani’s rath yatra had polarised society in north India and sparked off communal riots, leaving hundreds dead in their wake. Even after nearly 10 years, India has not been able to live down the ignominy of the masjid demolition. Our secular credentials have been tarnished. Beginning temple construction by force may squeeze out whatever is left of our claim to a democratic and pluralistic nation. The ball is in Vajpayee’s court. He has to ask himself how far he is willing to accommodate the fundamentalists and to what purpose.

Earlier Columns