How BJP’s Colossal Victory Will Bring Ayodhya Issue Into Headlines

It was only a matter of time that the Ayodhya imbroglio would return to hog the headlines. To begin with, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s colossal electoral victory in Uttar Pradesh made it clear that the party would escalate its response. This would be necessitated because supporters would question its lack of initiative.This sentiment got further impetus after Yogi Adityanath was handpicked as chief minister. His image of a polariser along with monochromatic approach to issues, made supporters exultant, and they anticipated immediate action on the temple front.But the biggest reason for expecting the Ayodhya issue to stage a major comeback is that this year marks the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Masjid.Also Read: Ayodhya DeQoded: Ram Lalla and a Contrived MiracleThe Issue Will Continue to Heat Up Till DecemberSince its first anniversary in 1993, the day has been observed diversely by rival groups – by the Sangh Parivar as Shaurya Diwas or Valour Day, and as a day of protest and mourning by the Muslim organisations. Between now and December, the issue will continue to heat up one way or another, as hardliners in both communities draw up plans for show of strength.With such backdrop, the unexpected decision of Chief Justice of India, JS Khehar, to wade into a controversy is perplexing. It is true that he cannot be legally faulted for making the offer to mediate between the two sides and say that he was willing to “get our learned people, people concerned with the matter, try and do the needful”.Also Read: Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid Row: Guess What? Nobody Wants a ConsensusThe Legal Complications of the DisputeBut by making the suo motu offer, the CJI revealed scant knowledge of history and complexity of the longest running legal and political dispute in independent India. The offer to negotiate was needless and can be made out by Subramanian Swamy rejecting the offer.His plea for allowing a temple to be constructed was being heard by Justice Khehar along with Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice DY Chandrachud. Swamy told the Court that he had already spoken to all the parties but to no avail.Yet, the CJI ploughed along, stating his willingness to depute brother judges. Naivety was on public display in his argument that the parties “need a moderator to sit in-between because there are tough issues to sort out...Speak to them again...These are issues of religion, involving sentiments. Sit across the board and settle.”Also Read: Ayodhya Decoded: Retracing The Fall of The Disputed StructureFailed Attempts at SettlementFact of the matter is that since 1986, there have been innumerable attempts at thrashing out a negotiated settlement, but this has made no headway. This is because while the Hindu groups fighting the case remain adamant on “mandir waheen banaenge” (the temple will be constructed there) demand, those who claim to fight for rights of Muslims, say that the Hindu groups are welcome to build the temple anywhere except the spot where the Babri Masjid stood prior to its demolition.Legal obstacles and political complications prevent resolution of the conflict. To begin with the most immediate, the number of appeals against the Allahabad High Court verdict of September 2010 are numerous.After the HC verdict ordering division of the Ayodhya land into three parts –1/3 for the temple, 1/3 to Sunni Wakf Board, and the remaining to the Nirmohi Akhara, fourteen appeals were filed.Out of these, eight were moved by Muslim individuals or organisations against Hindu parties. Five Hindu appellants named Hindu parties as defendants, and one Hindu party named Muslim parties.Also Read: Swamy Seeks Urgent Hearing on Ayodhya’s Ram Mandir Dispute‘Muslim Defendants Should be Prohibited From Interfering’More significantly, two of the cases in which both the parties are Hindus, the entity called Ram Lalla Virajman, considered a living deity and accepted by HC as a matter of faith, is the defendant.The deity was added to list of parties in the already convoluted title suit in July 1989. VHP vice president, Deoki Nandan Aggrawal, who retired as a High Court judge, pleaded before the District judge, Faizabad that he be considered as the "next best friend of the deities" and that "entire premises of Ram Janmabhoomi be declared as belonging to the plaintiff's deities”.He asked that Muslim defendants be prohibited from interfering with construction of a new temple that would be built after demolishing existing buildings and structures.It is therefore evident, even if Justice Khehar’s offer to volunteer is accepted, finding a solution by discussions within a motley crowd of more than 28 people is going to be next to impossible, given complete antagonistic nature of their basic positions.Besides, there can be no agreement on who can speak with whom, and whether they can speak on behalf of their community.There is need to examine why the Supreme Court has not heard the matter after putting a stay on the HC judgement in 2011. A definitive answer to this will be tough to find, and there is no knowing whether the apex court wishes to escape judging on a highly contentious matter which cannot satisfy either of the two communities, and has defied legal settlement since 1950.Also Read: Back to Babri Era: With Adityanath’s Rise, It’s 1992 Once AgainWhen a Judge Concluded the Site Belonged to Ram LallaIn 1994, SC returned the Presidential Reference after the government did not commit to accepting the verdict.Ironically, BJP leaders welcomed the CJI’s initiative, though they would be happiest with a judicial verdict on the lines of the minority judgement in the three-judge HC Bench.In 2010, Justice DV Sharma, did not agree with the one-third formula because he opined that the outer courtyard was in the exclusive possession of Hindus for worship, and in the inner courtyard (in the “disputed structure”) “they were also worshipping”, and hence, they had exclusive rights to the entire site.Secondly, he wrote in his dissenting judgement that “the disputed site is the birthplace of Lord Ram.” He added:Place of birth is a juristic person and is a deity. It is personified as the spirit of divine worshipped as birthplace of Lord Rama as a child...area covered under the central dome of the disputed structure is the birthplace of Lord Rama as per faith and belief of Hindus.He concluded that the entire site belonged to Ram Lalla and his Hindu worshippers.The BJP has contended all this while that a solution is possible either by legal or legislative means provided government wills. But stating that a settlement is possible by enacting new laws is easier said than done. Not only will the finest legal minds have to burn the midnight oil to find a way out, but this will not be an easy task in Parliament, especially if this involves passing a constitutional amendment bill.The Ayodhya issue remains a thorn in the flesh for the BJP, though Justice Khehar’s suggestion has enabled the party to keep the matter simmering once again with little effort of its own. Its leader will be satisfied that no one can accuse them of stirring the pot.Also Read: Does Ram Mandir Matter to Fitness Freaks in Ayodhya This Election?( The writer is an author and journalist based in Delhi. He has authored the book ‘The Demolition: India at the Crossroads’ and ‘Narendra Modi: The Man, The Times’. He can be reached @NilanjanUdwin. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)

BECOME A MEMBER

How BJP’s Colossal Victory Will Bring Ayodhya Issue Into Headlines

Since 2017 marks the 25th anniversary of Babri Masjid demolition, the issue will continue to rise till December.

Read Latest News and Breaking News at The Quint, browse for more from opinion

Topics: BJP Ayodhya Yogi Adityanath