Skip to main content

If Govt of India constructs Ramlalla temple, we would 'return' to feudal times

By Battini Rao*
The November 9 judgment of Supreme Court gives the entire 2.77 acres of the Babri Mosque land to the deity Ramlalla Virajman, It also directs the central government to form a trust to oversee the construction of a temple at the site of the erstwhile mosque. These decisions of the highest court have pushed the country towards a religion based majoritarian polity, where matters of faith would stand above the rule of law, and faith of the majority community will be treated supreme.
According to the judgment the belief of some Hindus that the mosque site is the birth place of god Ram is not the basis of its decision. It also calls the placement of idols during the night of Dec 22-23 in the Babri mosque a desecration, and further declares the 1992 destruction of the mosque a ‘violation of the law’. Given these claims, court’s decision baffles common sense.
If the actions of the followers of the deity Ram in 1949 and 1992 were illegal, then how do they get the possession of the site where the mosque once stood? A question like this is an example of a robust secular common sense, which expects that law should be same for all, and that any violation of the law in the name of religion is still a crime.
The court wants to balance its judgment by asking the Central government to give six acres of land to Muslims to build a mosque in lieu of the one destroyed in 1992. This kind of balancing, while at the same time rewarding majoritarian communal forces, is no secularism. In fact a reading of court’s judgment shows that it violates secularism at many places.
First of all, the court showed an unseemly haste in deciding the title suit over the land of Babri mosque, while the criminal trial over the destruction of the mosque is still pending 27 years after the crime. Instead, the court should have speeded up the criminal trial so that people and organisations guilty of that crime could be barred from the title suit.
Secondly, the judgment places an unequal burden for providing evidence on the two sides. Muslims lost the site because they could not prove that namaz was offered in it between 1528 and 1857. Hindus get the site because a few European travellers in the eighteenth century mention Hindus offering prayers in the outer courtyard.
The same accounts also mention the building as a mosque, yet the court refuses to accept the fact that a mosque is meant for offering prayers, and expects Muslims to give hard evidence that they actually offered namaz.
Thirdly, the court grants juridical authority to deity RamlallaVirajman against established practice. Juridical authority is granted to deities of established temples, which also own other property. These deities are treated as legal minors under the guardianship of associations formed under proper rules. None of these conditions hold true for Ramlalla.
This deity has no property or temple for which it needs juridical authority. It was put in the legal domain in 1989 when its followers entered the ongoing civil suit over the land of Babri mosque because they wanted to build a temple at its place. If the idols placed surreptitiously inside the mosque in 1949 are taken to be the material representation of this deity, then the first public act done in its name is covered in illegality. 
Hindus get the site because a few European travellers in the 18th century mention Hindus offering prayers in the outer courtyard
The court treated the issue of juridical authority of the deity independently of the actions and intentions its followers. This opens the floodgates for any group of people demanding a juridical status for their favoured deity, and then pushing their murky agendas legally behind the divine status of the deity.
The fourth violation of the principles of secularism is asking the Indian government to form a trust for making a temple. A secular state should ensure equal freedom to followers all religions to practice their belief. It has no business in building places of worship. Indian government took over the management of many places of worship from the princely states when these were incorporated into the Indian union. Many state governments also provide administrative support to mass pilgrimages. 
However, asking the government to get involved in construction of a temple, which does not exist, is an entirely different matter. It will take India back to feudal times when sovereign power was always associated a religion. 
A fundamental difference between feudal polities and modern democracies is the recognition of the personal freedom and equality of every human. In contrast, humans under feudal polities are treated primarily as members of communities, and are assumed to be bound by community rules. A feudal polity will allow a khap panchayat to dictate who can marry whom, a modern democracy will protect the right of the young to make their choice.
The apex court’s judgment gives a legal stamp of approval to the Hindutva agenda of turning India into a majoritarian state in which democratic rights of every citizen will be under threat. Almost all political parties which oppose BJP have welcomed the judgment because they think they cannot win elections if they are seen to be not toeing religious sentiments of the majority community. This is very unfortunate.
The Supreme Court must review its judgment and remove all points where it violates secularism. People and organisations which committed the crime of destruction of Babri mosque should be brought to justice expeditiously. People of India should assert their secular common sense and express their opposition to the Supreme Court verdict.
---
*Convenor, People's Alliance for Democracy and Secularism (PADS). Contact: battini.rao@gmail.com

Comments

TRENDING

Mystery around Gujarat PSU 'transfer' of Rs 250 crore to Canadian firm Karnalyte

By AK Luke, IAS (Retd)*
While returning from a Board meeting of the Oil India Limited (OIL) in Ahmedabad some time in 2012, two officers of the Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd (GSFC), Nanavaty and Patel,  saw me off at the airport. They said they were proceeding to Canada in connection with a project GSFC had entered into with a company there. As we were running late, I hastily wished them the best.

Savarkar in Ahmedabad 'declared' two-nation theory in 1937, Jinnah followed 3 years later

By Our Representative
One of the top freedom fighters whom BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi revere the most, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, was also a great supporter of the two nation theory for India, one for Hindus another for Muslims, claims a new expose on the man who is also known to be the original proponent of the concept of Hindutva.

Indians have made 119 nations their ‘karma bhumi’: US-based Hindu NGO tells Rupani

Counterview Desk
In a stinging letter to Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani, the US-based Hindus for Human Rights (HfHR), referring to the report citing his justification for the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) – that “while Muslims can choose any one of the 150 Islamic countries in the world (for residence), India is the only country for Hindus" – has said, he should remember, Hindus have made several countries, including USA, their home.

J&K continues to be haunted, as parts of India 'degenerate' into quasi-Kashmir situation

By Rajendran Narayanan*, Sandeep Pandey**
“Jab har saans mein bandook dikhe toh baccha kaise bekhauf rahe?” (How can a child be fearless when she sees a gun in every breath?) remarked Anwar, a gardener from Srinagar, when asked about the situation in Kashmir. On November 30, 2019, a walk through an iron gate in a quiet neighbourhood of Srinagar took us inside a public school. It was 11 am when typically every school is abuzz with activity. Not here though.

What about religious persecution of Dalits, Adivasis, asks anti-CAA meet off Ahmedabad

By Rajiv Shah
A well-attended Dalit rights meet under the banner “14 Pe Charcha” (discussion on Article 14 of the Indian Constitution), alluding to Prime Minister Narendra Modi well-known campaign phrase of the 2014 Parliamentary elections, “chai pe charcha” (discussion over cup of tea), organized off Ahmedabad, has resolved on Wednesday to hold a 14 kilometres-long rally on April 14 to oppose the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), enacted on December 10-11.

Tata Mundra's possible closure? Power ministry's 'pressure tactic' on consumer states

By Bharat Patel*
Tata power has announced to the Union Ministry of Power that Tata Power may be forced to stop operating  its imported coal-based Mundra Ultra-Mega Power Project (UMPP) after February, 2020. It is not only unfortunate but also criminal that irreversible damage has been caused to the fragile ecosystem of Mundra coast for a project that will have a running life of only seven years.

Upendra Baxi on foolish excellence, Indian judges and Consitutional cockroaches

By Rajiv Shah
In a controversial assertion, top legal expert Upendra Baxi has sought to question India's Constitution makers for neglecting human rights and social justice. Addressing an elite audience in Ahmedabad, Prof Baxi said, the constitutional idea of India enunciated by the Constituent Assembly tried to resolve four key conflicting concepts: governance, development, rights and justice.

Population control? 10% Indian couples want to delay next pregnancy, but fail

Counterview Desk
Shireen Jejeebhoy, director at Aksha Centre for Equity and Wellbeing, previously senior associate at the Population Council, India, argues that the debate on the country's population was fuelled by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Independence Day address to the nation, where he drew attention to “concern” about the challenges posed by this ‘exploding’ population growth, needs to centre around the promotion of rights and education, instead of the language of explosion and the threat of coercion that this term implies.

Kerala governor turned History Congress into political arena, 'insulted' Prof Irfan Habib

Counterview Desk
In a signed statement, office bearers of the Aligarh Society of History and Archaeology (ASHA), Prof Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi (president), Prof Jabir Raza (vice-president), Prof Manvendra Kumar Pundhir (secretary) and Prof Farhat Hasan (joint secretary), have said that Kerala governor Arif Mohammad Khan had sought to insult veteran historian Prof Irfan Habib, 88, at the 80th session of the Indian History Congress, even as turning it into his “political arena”.