by admin | May 25, 2021 | Opinions
By Amulya Ganguli,
There was never any doubt about the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) anti-minority electoral gambits but the agenda has now been unambigiously and forcefully articulated by the party’s friend, philosopher and guide, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
Delivering the organisation’s customary message on the occasion of Dussehra/Vijay Dashami, its chief, Mohan Bhagwat, has left no stone unturned about what the Narendra Modi government should immediately do — which is to start building the Ram temple in Ayodhya even by enacting an ordinance.
By pointedly ignoring the fact that the issue is currently before the Supreme Court, the RSS chief has taken the party and the Hindutva brotherhood to the days of the Ramjanmabhoomi movement in the 1990s when the saffron storm-troopers used to say that the courts can have no say in a matter of faith.
Apart from a reiteration of this aggressive “religious” stance, Bhagwat’s directive to the BJP to get down to business and not dilly-dally any longer on building the temple has scrapped Atal Behari Vajpayee’s decision in 1996 to put in cold storage the three “core” issues of the Sangh parivar — building the temple, doing away with Article 370 of the Constitution conferring special status on Jammu and Kashmir, and introducing a uniform civil code
That the negation of Vajpayee’s wishes has been done in the year of his death is not without significance. It remains to be seen whether the RSS will give any “advice” to the government on the two other issues — Article 370 and the uniform civil code.
But why the sudden hurry about constructing the temple? There may be two reasons. One is that it is the last throw of the dice by the party and the parivar in an election season to consolidate its vote bank of communal-minded Hindus at a time when the less than favourable economic scene may make sections of the liberal Hindus, who voted for the BJP in 2014, drift away.
The other is the realisation in the saffron brotherhood that it is now or never where the temple is concerned since the BJP is unlikely to get a majority on its own in the Lok Sabha in 2019. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) led by it may get it, but it will not be easy for the BJP to persuade some of its allies such as the Janata Dal (United) — which has opposed the BJP’s favourite triple talaq ordinance — and the Akali Dal to endorse a construction programme which cannot but alienate the minorities.
Notwithstanding BJP president Amit Shah’s conviction that the party will reign for half a century, there may be an awareness in the organisation that the 2014 outcome was the result of several unforeseen events — the Congress’s sudden and somewhat inexplicable collapse and Modi’s emergence (against the wishes of several in his party) as some kind of a messiah. From this standpoint, 2019 will not be the same as 2014.
Ever since the party and the parivar sensed that the mantras of neither “achhe din” (good days) nor “sabka saath, sabka vikas” (development for all) is evoking a favourable response, the focus of the saffron propaganda has been on Hindu-Muslim polarisation.
Whether it is extending the scope of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) from Assam to other states or the removal of long-established Muslim names in Uttar Pradesh like Mughalsarai and Allahabad, the BJP’s aim has been to send the message that Muslims will be under pressure to prove the genuiness of their citizenship and that India’s multi-cultural past will be erased as Hindu rashtra takes root.
Along with the direct and indirect offensive against Muslims, the parivar is also intent on confirming its Hindu credentials by opposing the Supreme Court’s verdict allowing women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala on the grounds it violates centuries-old beliefs.
The Sabarimala episode enables the RSS and the BJP to try and kill two birds with one stone. One is to project themselves as the standard-bearers of Hinduism, and the other is to flaunt a defiance of the Supreme Court.
The court has aroused the saffron lobby’s ire ever since it delivered a series of “progressive” judgments (of which Sabarimala is one) such as the one upholding the rights of privacy, which the government argued was an elitist concept, and the other was to decriminalise homosexuality in a case from which the government recused itself evidently because while the legalisation went against the BJP’s crusty orthodoxy, the party could not afford to be seen as living in Victorian times.
Sabarimala has given an opportunity to the RSS and the BJP to defy the apex court and suggest that it is not right all the time. The defiance may have also been motivated by the #MeToo movement which has claimed the scalp of a Union minister and persuaded another minister to say that those who support the movement are “perverted”.
Among the others who also answer to the description of being perverted are the so-called “Urban Naxalites”, a new form of abuse coined by the RSS and the BJP for the Left-Liberals who have always been called anti-nationals. Not surprisingly, another of the RSS chief’s advice to the government was to keep the “Urban Naxalites” under surveillance.
It will be interesting to know what those “secularists” who interacted with the RSS recently like former President Pranab Mukherjee and the business tycoon, Ratan Tata, think of the pitch for the temple and the castigation of “Urban Naxalites”.
(Amulya Ganguli is a political analyst. The views expressed are personal. He can be reached at amulyaganguli@gmail.com)
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
New Delhi : The BJP on Monday accused the Congress of trying to build a momentum against the construction of the Ram Temple at Ayodhya and asked party President Rahul Gandhi to clear his stand on the issue.
“They are trying to build a momentum against the construction of Ram Temple. We want an early verdict but they are trying to delay,” BJP Spokesperson G.V.L. Narasimha Rao told a press conference.
His comments came in the wake of the reported remarks of Congress leader and Thiruvananthapuram MP Shashi Tharoor. who said on Sunday that while a vast majority of Hindus believe that Ayodhya was the birthplace of Lord Ram, no good Hindu would want to see a Ram temple built by demolishing somebody else’s place of worship.
Rao said Tharoor’s comments is yet another attempt to somehow “muddy waters” at a time when the Supreme Court is likely to take up this issue on a fast-track basis.
“Linking construction of temple to demolition of the structure several years ago is an attempt by the Congress to indulge in vote bank politics,” he said.
Rao said that the BJP hopes for an early verdict in this regard while many of the Congress leaders are again and again giving statements against the construction of the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya.
Senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal had earlier demanded that the Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute should be heard after the 2019 general elections which triggered a major political storm.
Rao, a Rajya Sabha member, also took on Rahul Gandhi accusing him of indulging in vote bank politics.
“Rahul Gandhi sometimes turns into a Shiv Bhakt and then goes to meet the intellectuals to say that they are a party for the Muslims. He should answer whether he is a Hindu or not. Will Rahul clearly speak about his party’s stand on Ram temple,” he said.
On his part, Tharoor accused the media of distorting his words vis-a-vis the Ram temple issue and stressed that whatever he said was his personal opinion and not his party’s opinion.
“I condemn the malicious distortion of my words by some media in the service of political masters. I had said, ‘Most Hindus would want a temple at what they believe to be Ram’s birthplace. But no good Hindu would want it to be built by destroying another’s place of worship’,” Tharoor said in a tweet.
“I was asked for my personal opinion at a literary festival and gave it as such. I am not a spokesperson for my party and did not claim to be speaking for it,” he added.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
New Delhi : By a majority 2-1 judgement that could hasten the process of hearing in the vexed Ramjanambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, the Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a plea for referring the issue to a larger Constitution Bench and referred the case to a three-judge bench to be set up that will begin hearing from October 29.
“We are of the considered opinion that no case has been made out to refer the Constitution Bench judgment of this court in Ismail Faruqui case for reconsideration,” said Justice Ashok Bhushan, reading the judgement on behalf of himself and Chief Justice Dipak Misra, who headed Thursday’s three-judge bench.
The bench was giving its verdict on petitions by some Muslims who had pleaded that the 2010 judgement of the Allahabad High Court splitting the title dispute into three parts be heard by a Constitution Bench as it involved reconsideration of a 1994 ruling by a five-judge bench of the apex court which had held that mosque was not an essential part of Islam to offer namaz.
Thursday’s order assumes significance in view of the fact that a possible early judgement in the case could have implications in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections as the Ayodhya dispute has been a major electoral issue in the last over 30 years.
The petitioners had contended that while deciding the title suit in 2010, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court had referred to the observations made in the 1994 judgement by the five-judge bench.
However, in a dissenting ruling, Justice Abdul Nazeer said the judgement in the 1994 Ismail Faruqui case needed reconsideration and the matter should be referred to a larger Constitution bench.
The majority judgement on Thursday held that a newly constituted bench will commence hearing from October 29 on a batch of petitions filed by both the sides — Hindu and Muslim stakeholders — challenging the 2010 judgement trifurcating the disputed site into three parts for Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and the original Muslim litigant.
“To conclude, we again make it clear that questionable observations made in Ismail Faruqui’s case as noted above were made in context of land acquisition. Those observations were neither relevant for deciding the suits nor relevant for deciding these appeals,” Justice Bhushan said.
“The issues, which have arisen in these appeals (Ramjanambhoomi-Babri Masjid) are no doubt important issues, which have to be heard and decided in these appeals. Normally appeals arising out of suits are placed before a bench of two judges but looking to the importance of the matter, the present appeals have already been placed before three-judge bench.
“For the aforesaid reasons, we do not agree with the submission of petitioner that these appeals be referred to Constitution Bench of five judges to reconsider the constitution bench judgment in Ismail Faruqui’s case,” Justice Bhushan said in the verdict.
In his minority judgement, Justice Nazeer said “questionable” observations in the Ismail Faruqui ruling were arrived at without undertaking a comprehensive examination and they had permeated the judgement in the main Ayodhya title suit.
He said a Constitution Bench must decide what constitutes essential practices of a religion and thereafter the Ayodhya land dispute should be heard.
Justice Nazeer also said that whether mosque was an essential part of Islam for offering namaz was to be decided considering the religious beliefs and requires detailed consideration.
“It is clear from the aforesaid decisions that the question as to whether a particular religious practice is an essential or integral part of the religion is a question which is to be considered by considering the doctrine, tenets and beliefs of the religion. It is also clear that the examination of what constitutes an essential practice requires detailed examination as reflected in the aforesaid judgments,” Justice Nazeer said.
He also said that the question of the 1994 Ismail Farooqi judgement needed to be referred to a larger Constitution Bench.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
New Delhi : The Supreme Court will likely pronounce on Thursday its verdict on the plea by Muslim litigants seeking direction that a larger Constitution bench hear the batch of petitions challenging the 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict which directed splitting into three parts the disputed site at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh.
The bench of chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer reserved the verdict on the plea by the Muslim litigants seeking reconsideration of the part of 1994 top court judgement which had said that “mosque was not essential to Islam for offering namaz”.
The judgment was reserved on July 20.
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court in its September 30, 2010, verdict ordered that the disputed site be divided into three parts — one for deity (Ramlala Virajmaan), another for Nirmohi Akhara — a Hindu sect — and third to the original litigant in the case for the Muslims.
The Uttar Pradesh government, which is not a party in the title suit, had questioned the Muslim litigants in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit case for making “belated efforts” seeking a relook at the 1994 Ismail Farooqui judgment that had said that mosques were not an integral part of religious practice of offering prayers.
The State government had said that the Muslim parties did not question the legality of the 1994 judgement till the appeal against 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment on the ownership of the disputed land was taken up for hearing by the top court.
During the course of the hearing Justice Bhushan had observed that nobody was questioning that mosque is essential to Islam, but the question is whether offering namaz in mosque was essential.
The Hindu parties said that reference to 1994 judgement in the hearing of the title suit in no way impacted the 2010 High Court judgment.
The court was told that the birthplace of Lord Ram cannot be shifted to another site, while a mosque with no particular religious significance to the Muslims can be shifted as that will “not affect the right to practice religion by offering ‘namaz’ in other mosques”.
To go to pilgrimage is a practice of religious faith both for the Muslims and the Hindus as well, but for the Muslims, “Mecca and Medina alone are places of particular significance” as pilgrimage centres, but for them such was not the case with Ayodhya/Babri Masjid.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
Yogi Adityanath
Lucknow : Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Saturday said the date for construction of a grand Ram temple will be set by Lord Ram himself.
Speaking at a conclave in the state capital, organised by a Hindi newspaper, the monk-turned-politician said what has to happen at a given time will happen at that time only. “No body can stop if once it is ordained by the gods.”
He also pointed out how previous state governments were afraid of visiting the temple town of Ayodhya and added that he has visited the holy town, so that it can be developed to the level it should be.
To a question on education, the Chief Minister said for years a section of the society was being deprived of modern and technical education and his government is committed to changing it.
“Children of a specific section are being deprived of modern education and restricted to ‘mazhabi shiksha’ (religious education). We have decided to change it and hence we have initiated modernization of Madarsas,” Adityanath said.
He also trashed the efforts of the opposition to gang up against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and said this “mahagathbandhan” (grand alliance) would never work as there is confusion over who would be its leader.
He also refuted charges that the BJP pursues politics of caste and community and pointed out that the mantra of BJP governments was only and only development. “Welfare of the people and comprehensive development drives the BJP government,” he added.
Adityanath also rubbished charges of government laxity in the Deoria incident where girls and women were sexually abused in a government-run shelter home. “We acted immediately and the guilty have been brought to book.”
Claiming that the BJP government had rolled out several thousand jobs for the unemployed youth, Adityanath went on to say that the state government would be recruiting 1.37 lakh teachers and 1.62 lakh police personnel.
Strict action against criminals has yielded good results after which investment worth crores of rupees has come to Uttar Pradesh, he added.
—IANS
