People's Democracy

IT appears very reassuring. The BJP has for the first time in many years not spoken of a "magnificent Ram temple" in Ayodhya as part of its election campaign manifesto. But the party president, Jana Krishnamurthy, has also said that the agenda is not about the Ram temple at all, not, that is, till 2004! This has been the most significant and revealing thing that has been said by any BJP member in a long time, and one wonders why it is not being given the importance it deserves.

When the PM met the VHP–led sants after their week-long Chetavani Yatra, or 'Warning Rally' last month, most analysts thought the VHP had been royally snubbed. But you only need to look a little further to see the truth. The law minister has been instructed to look into the 'feasibility' of the "undisputed land" around where the Babri Masjid once stood, being given to the Ram Janma Bhoomi Nyas, an organization now totally controlled by the VHP. The fact of the matter is that the category of 'undisputed land’ being talked of by the government, is itself misleading. So far, most mandir related statements, calculated though they were, were not made from the point of view of a government. The forums, carefully chosen, were to be party meetings, or whilst meeting the 'Friends of the BJP' abroad.

This time, it is all very official, and disturbingly specific. A look at the Supreme Court judgement of October 24, 1994, which okayed the acquisition of land by the central government after the demolition, would tell you, there is no land within the 67 acres acquired by the Narasimha Rao government on January 7, 1993, which can be termed undisputed! The idea of acquiring the land itself was to facilitate that party which wins the case eventually, be it Hindu or Muslim.

The very purpose of acquiring the land, in the words of the Supreme Court judgement as reported in (1994) 6 SCC Page 360, in Para 49, is as follows:

"…….The justification given for the acquisition of the larger area including the property respecting which title is not disputed, is that the same is necessary to ensure that the final outcome of adjudication should not be rendered meaningless by the existence of properties belonging to Hindus in the vicinity of the disputed structure, in case the Muslims are found entitled to the disputed site. This obviously means that in the event of the Muslims succeeding in the adjudication of the dispute requiring the structure to be handed over to the Muslim community, their success should not be thwarted by denial of proper access to, and enjoyment of rights in, the disputed area by exercise of rights of ownership of Hindu owners of the adjacent properties…."

Para 96 of the same judgement makes it clear that the vesting of rights of land adjacent to the disputed site in the hands of the government of India is absolute, and nothing can be done about it, till the dispute is finally settled.

By giving the matter to the Law minister, it is, however, obvious that there could be two courses of action the government could be contemplating.

One is that the law minister, sometime before the first phase of polls in UP, could state that there is a `prima facie’ case for giving away a part of the surrounding area to the Ram Janam Bhoomi Nyas, enabling the BJP to ake a wishy-washy commitment in the hope of mopping up some votes.

The second course, that seems more likely, is also the more dangerous. The VHP had initially declared that it would be organizing about 20,000 people each day from the 18^th of February till the 12^th of March, to take part in a yagya which would decide when the temple could be built at the disputed site. Now, significantly, the VHP has changed its mind, by their own admission in view of the elections. They have now declared that they would start assembling people in Ayodhya on the 24^th - after the elections, not during the polling.

This means that they want to avoid stressing the state administration before the polls, but, once counting starts, and, going by most pre-poll surveys, a non-BJP government begins to take shape in the state, there would be no holds barred on the mandir movement! Crowds would gather, there would be flare-ups, and tension would prevail all along, to make sure that a possible non-BJP government has enough on its hands before it can even start!

It is obvious that all this is geared for the next polls. It would be the BJP central leadership’s decision to make an attempt once again to use this mandir card. Atal Behari Vajpayee has already made it clear in his musings released last year, that resolving Ayodhya, along with Kashmir, is a passion with him. Once again an attempt would be made to divide the polity on this matter, from which the BJP would hope to draw political mileage, as its attempts to gain any kind of ground elsewhere has miserably failed.

The BJP is feeling smug as its allies have maintained a screeching silence on this issue, and if George Fernandes’ statements are to be read in totality, the allies are too weak and too discredited to make any sort of break from the BJP at this stage, even on the mandir issue.

If this possibility of a society in turmoil once again on this meaningless issue has to be averted, and the focus got back on issues of our daily bread and butter, it is not the allies of this irresponsible party that can be trusted.