Latest update April 24th, 2024 12:59 AM
Oct 03, 2010 Editorial
There was much trepidation, not just across India, but in many other parts of the world, in anticipation of the judgement on the case that pitted Hindus against Muslims in a claim over ownership of a 2.77 acre of land in the city of Ayodhya. The dispute centered on the claim of Hindus that the mosque on the land had been constructed after destroying a Mandir that marked the birthplace of one of their most sacred Divine incarnations, Sri Ram.
While the case itself was sixty years old, the apprehension was grounded in more recent history.
In December 1992, Hindu partisans took matters into their own hands; demolished the Mosque and triggered riots in many parts of the country resulting in some 2000 deaths. With the already beleaguered Commonwealth Games pulling thousands of foreigners into the country, it was not just Indians that hoped the verdict would not precipitate a repetition of 1992.
While religious disputes that degenerate into violence have unfortunately become quite common in the last century, the Ayodhya dispute, not coincidentally, came at a time when India was also belatedly grappling with the question of “national identity”.
The partition in 1947 into what eventually became India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (1970) arose out of the demand for a “Muslim” homeland. But while some Muslims did migrate to Pakistan from India (which soon declared itself officially “Muslim”) even more chose to remain.
India declared itself “secular” but the ambiguities over what this meant in practice eventually became a sore issue in the majority Hindu camp, still smarting over the long Muslim rule. In 1949, some Hindus installed an image of Sri Rama under the main dome of the mosque, and Muslims refused to pray there any longer. The court case was filed the following year and eventually there were three plaintiffs, one Muslim and two Hindu.
What brought matters to the boil in the late 80’s was the involvement of politicians from one of the major political parties, the BJP, into the dispute. They supported the position of the Hindus and on a wave of support for their stance, after the demolition of the Masjid in which some were involved, they took over the reins of power in India.
They fully supported the notion however that the dispute should be settled by the judicial process and there the matter rested.
In their decision of last Thursday, the Court made a Solomonic judgement, based on broader notions of justice, fairness and the welfare of the broader society than on strict legal principles. The three-man court, comprising of one Muslim and two Hindu jurists, unanimously (even though for different reasons) agreed that the spot on which the image of the deity Sri Ram was installed was His birthplace and by majority decision agreed that the land ought to be divided into three equal plots for the three plaintiffs.
By and large, the decision appears to have been accepted by the society at large even though two of the plaintiffs have indicated that they will appeal the decision, to the apex court.
In a very mature spirit, which local activists could well emulate, all of the principal organisations, political, religious and social, have called for calm to prevail and for the judicial process to take its course. Mohan Bhagwat, leader of the RSS, which is considered the ideological centre of Hindu nationalism in India said, “I appeal to everyone, including Muslims, to forget the past and come forward to take part in our national culture.”
Kamal Farooqi, a member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, advised, “The judgement can begin a process of reconciliation.”
In our so much smaller country, if the letters columns are to be believed, much of our present conflict is rooted in matters rooted in our historical past. It would appear that the court in India has decided that these arguments cannot go on forever: even “facts” are actually constructed.
At some point we have to decide as to what is the interpretation of the ‘facts” that serve the entire country best; accept it and move on.
LISTEN HOW JAGDEO WILL MAKE ALL GUYANESE RICH!!!
Apr 24, 2024
Round 2 GFF Women’s League Division One Kaieteur Sports – The Guyana Police Force FC on Saturday last demolished Pakuri Jaguars FC with a 17 – 0 goal blitz at the Guyana Football...Kaieteur News – Just recently, the PPC determined that it does not have the authority to vitiate a contract which was... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]