AFSPA debate: Soldiers clear, but is everyone else?
September 27, 2010
Today's terrorist does not allow you the luxury of a magistrate's presence, notes
Major General Rajendra Prakash (retd), arguing why AFPSA is necessary.
With the Kashmir valley on the boil, the prolific public debate on the Armed Forces Special Powers Act has taken on an unusual stridency.
But a debate which is swayed by emotion, prejudice or cultivated ignorance, instead of resting on a bedrock of factual realities, becomes an exercise in mere sophistry.
Before we re-examine what AFSPA is all about, a word about the Indian soldier (means all members of the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force).
The Indian soldier is a citizen with equal obligations and the same rights as any other Indian citizen -- s/he is neither a 'slave' of the State or of the populace and nor is s/he a robot, to be to be manipulated by the exigencies of politics or populism.
Albeit, as long as she/he wears the uniform, s/he voluntarily denudes her/him-self of three fundamental rights granted by Article 19 of our Constitution, right of free association, the right of political activity and the right to communicate to the press -- all other Constitutional rights remain intact.
Further, a soldier voluntarily places her/himself under the statutory rigours of military discipline (Army/Navy/Air Force Acts) and is bound to obey all lawful commands of her/his military superior, unto death.
Next, the Indian armed forces are the servants of the State and its ultimate resort. They are duty-bound to do all that is necessary for the 'safety, honour and welfare' of our nation and to this end, faithfully and efficiently execute all lawful commands, directions and policies of the government in power, with fidelity and to the utmost of their ability.
Reciprocally, it is the duty of the State (and its other executive instruments) to provide the armed forces, the means and wherewithal essential to perform the responsibilities and tasks assigned to them.
Now for the AFSPA. Except in war, or when guarding the international border, the Indian Army has no Constitutional authority or legal powers to use force or fire-arms against anyone, whosoever.
Like any other Indian citizen, the only legal right a soldier has, is the right of 'private defence' (of life or property), which must be proved post-facto, in a court of law, and this takes many years of court hearings.
The only other possibility of such use of force by the armed forces is when called out in 'aid to civil authority', where a magistrate must be present at each spot, and s/he must allow the use of force in writing, on a particular form, and only after completing these procedures can troops be ordered to use minimum force.
Well, today's terrorist/insurgent/militant/Naxalite does not allow you the luxury of a magistrate's presence, ready with a pen and form (and one would not be handy, everywhere and all the time) -- you are shot dead or blown-up in a jiffy, unless you are quicker and forestall him.
Any military commander ordering his troops to operate in a counter-insurgency role (cordons and searches, ambushes, counter-ambushes, pitched battles) against folks of this ilk, would be giving an unlawful command, not liable to be obeyed.
If obeyed, it would land all commanders down the chain and whole corps, divisions, brigades, battalions, companies, platoons and infantry sections before the courts of law, on charges of murder, assault, injury and destruction of property, obviously leaving no time or resources for any other military activities, for years.
So, to ensure that the army is able to perform its basic function of external defence and internal security of the nation, some pragmatic persons in the 1950s invented AFSPA for the Naga hills, and now it is applied on a 'fire-fighting basis' elsewhere also, not by the Indian Army but by the Government of India, when things get out of hand!
So before undermining AFSPA, understand one thing clearly -- in a democracy, only the elected government is mandated to govern -- if it fails and cannot find political solutions, and needs to exert State power to enforce its writ, then the army may be called in by the State -- it does not come in on its own.
So, ordering a soldier, who is also a citizen, to carry out counter-insurgency operations in the absence of any legal mandate, is to order her/him to commit murder and mayhem and this is not a lawful command and is legally and morally open to disobedience.
You apply AFPSA (or any suitable enabling legal measure) and it becomes a military operation, done in a military manner, with restraint and responsibility.
Aberrations will occur amongst humans, will be punished severely and promptly, but these aberrations are not policy. As simple as that!
So all those frantic for the removal of AFSPA, need to be clear on this -- abolish AFSPA, humanise it or whatever, but before that resolve politically or governance-wise, the problems which force the State to impose AFSPA (convince the insurgents, militants, terrorists, Naxalites to stop the mayhem and valley youth to stop chucking stones at the behest of 'organisers').
From the service chiefs downwards, no one can order a soldier to obey an unlawful command -- to inflict violence without legitimate legal sanction.
Thus, debates based on crass ignorance of ground realities are harmful for the community -- it is like banning a book or a movie without having read/seen it.
Soldiers are quite clear on where they stand on AFPSA, but is everyone else?
http://news.rediff.com/column/2010/sep/27/column-why-the-indian-armed-forces-need-afspa.htm
News review
Saturday, October 23, 2010
orissakhabara: Sangh is rooted in the soil of the Motherland
orissakhabara: Sangh is rooted in the soil of the Motherland: "Ram Lal The RSS, from its inception in 1925, has tirelessly worked for the nation and making all Indians proud of their common civilisation..."
Sangh is rooted in the soil of the Motherland
Ram Lal
The RSS, from its inception in 1925, has tirelessly worked for the nation and making all Indians proud of their common civilisational heritage. In keeping with the highest traditions of Hinduism, the Sangh does not discriminate on grounds of caste, creed and religion. It celebrates pluralism
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is not an unknown name today. The Sangh’s Swayamsevaks are spread all over the world not only in India. There are regular shakhas from Ladakh to Andaman and various programmes are organised throughout the year. There are 50,000 shakhas in 35,000 places in the entire country and 9,500 weekly meetings and 8,500 monthly meetings are held. More than one-and-a-half lakh service activities are being undertaken by Swayamsevaks for the uplift of neglected sections of the society, for generation of self-confidence and national feelings among them. Many Swayamsevaks are running several organisations in different. In the event of any tragedy faced by the nation, the Swayamsevaks have rendered selfless service.
The RSS was born in 1925 on Vijaya Dashami. The founder of the Sangh was Dr Keshavrao Baliram Hedgewar. It is said about Dr Hedgewar that he was a born patriot. In his early age he had thrown the sweets given to him at school on Queen Victoria’s birthday into the dustbin. Later he asked his brother, “Why should we celebrate the birthday of Queen Victoria?” His life was full of many such incidents.
At an early age he associated himself with the nationalist movement. He joined Calcutta Medical College because Kolkata was the main centre of revolutionary activities. He worked with many great revolutionaries there. On return he worked for the freedom movement alongwith great leaders of that time. Handling the entire arrangements of the 1920 Nagpur Congress Session, Dr Hedgewar urged the Congress leaders to demand full independence. His plea was not accepted at that time. Later when the Congress passed the resolution of full independence at the Lahore Session of 1929, all the Sangh shakhas wrote letters of thanks to the Congress. Dr Hedgewar went to jail twice during the freedom movement as did several Swayamsevaks.
Dr Hedgewar was pained to see the country’s subjugation. That is why these words were spoken at the time of affirmation by Swayamsevaks: “I have become a Swayamsevak of the Sangh in order to make the country free.” The other thing which pained him was that the Hindu society had forgotten national self-respect and become defeatist and disunited. It was to correct this situation that the Sangh was formed with the aim of instilling the feelings of national self-respect, selflessness and unity in Hindu society.
This concept of Dr Hedgewar was the result of positive thinking. Its purpose was not to oppose someone. So, it would be against the basic principles of the organisation to term it anti-Muslim or anti-Christian. We often hear people prejudiced against any Hindu or nationalist organisation like the Sangh to describe it as “conservative” and “communal”. Due to Hindus being tolerant, all religions were welcomed in India. Their followers came here and settled. Some of them merged with the local culture and some retained their independent existence.
The Hindu believes that the manner in which rivers having different sources of origin merge with the sea, people following different paths merge into the creator of all. This view allowed people of different faiths to live in India. And this in turn led to the creation of a plural society. The pluralism we see today is not despite of but because of Hindus and Hinduism. If Hinduism were to be weakened, then neither India would remain India nor would pluralism survive. Can pluralism be imagined in Pakistan?
In this background the RSS is a national necessity of this country. Swayamsevaks of Sangh are discharging their national duty by organising Hindus. In the daily shakhas of the Sangh efforts are made to develop the body, mind and soul of Swayamsevaks and to instil national feelings in them.
After going through the prayer, pledge, solidarity source, solidarity mantra, which Swayamsevaks reiterate daily, one can understand the thoughts of the Sangh, what is taught in the Sangh and how the mind of Swayamsevaks works. Swayamsevaks worship the Motherland and pray for peace and prosperity of the nation. At the conclusion of every event, Swayamsevaks chant Bharatmata ki Jai. There is no room for caste, creed, provincialism, untouchability in the minds of Swayamsevaks.
Hence, at moments of crisis and in times of tragedy, Swayamsevaks do not bother about who are the victims. They are the first to organise relief work. This was evident during the devastating tsunami of 2004. Before that, Swayamsevaks were the first to reach out to the victims of the Super Cyclone in Odisha.
It would be worthwhile to remember that Swayamsevaks toiled day and night after two airliners crashed into each other, resulting in the death of more than 300 passengers. The accident occurred in Haryana. Nearly all the dead were Muslims, and Swayamsevaks recovered their bodies, put them into coffins and handed them over to their relatives who were provided with board and lodging. Later the Swayamsevaks were felicitated at the local masjid.
Whenever there is a natural disaster like an earthquake, floods or cyclone, Swayamsevaks across the country collect relief material and rush to the disaster site. Destroyed houses are rebuilt, ruined survivors are rehabilitated. The Swayamsevaks do all this and more because they see everybody in India as children of Bharat Mata and deserving of their assistance. Swayamsevaks who migrate to other countries carry this spirit of selfless service and sacrifice with them. The good work being done by the Swayamsevaks in Mauritius, Trinidad & Tobago, the US, Europe and across the world bears testimony to this fact.
Thousands of Swayamsevaks have mobilised resources and set up Seva Bharati, Seva Prakalp Sansthan, Banvasi Kalyan Ashram and various other trusts and institutions to look after the welfare of disadvantaged sections of our society. Their purpose is to instil self-confidence among the poor and the under-privileged, those living on the margins, by empowering them educationally and economically. The results of these initiatives have been spectacular.
The Swayamsevaks have in the forefront of organising civil support for the armed forces during wars and conflicts. Whether on the frontline or in cities, towns and villages, Swayamsevaks have toiled tirelessly during the 1947, 1962, 1965 and 1971 wars. They were also active during the Kargil conflict. Many Swayamsevaks have sacrificed their lives also. Others have suffered injuries. They have neither sought nor received either compensation or medals of bravery from the Government. For them it was service to the nation, to be performed with utmost dedication and without any selfish motives. It is such selfless service that makes the Sangh and its Swayamsevaks stand tall and proud.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is a national asset. It should be treasured and its services used for national reconstruction and making India stronger.
A lot more can be said about the good work being done by the Swayamsevaks and the Sangh, especially in the field of social reform and empowerment. This is being done without any publicity; often the Swayamsevaks remain in the background. That is the essence of selfless service. The Sangh is rooted in the soil of the motherland and seeks inspiration from its cultural identity and civilisational history. For the Sangh, the nation comes before everything else. Hence, Swayamsevaks dedicate their lives to the nation and toil for their selfless cause.
-- The writer is General Secretary, Organisation, of the BJP. He is a lifelong member of the RSS.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/290309/Dedicated-to-selfless-service.html
The RSS, from its inception in 1925, has tirelessly worked for the nation and making all Indians proud of their common civilisational heritage. In keeping with the highest traditions of Hinduism, the Sangh does not discriminate on grounds of caste, creed and religion. It celebrates pluralism
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is not an unknown name today. The Sangh’s Swayamsevaks are spread all over the world not only in India. There are regular shakhas from Ladakh to Andaman and various programmes are organised throughout the year. There are 50,000 shakhas in 35,000 places in the entire country and 9,500 weekly meetings and 8,500 monthly meetings are held. More than one-and-a-half lakh service activities are being undertaken by Swayamsevaks for the uplift of neglected sections of the society, for generation of self-confidence and national feelings among them. Many Swayamsevaks are running several organisations in different. In the event of any tragedy faced by the nation, the Swayamsevaks have rendered selfless service.
The RSS was born in 1925 on Vijaya Dashami. The founder of the Sangh was Dr Keshavrao Baliram Hedgewar. It is said about Dr Hedgewar that he was a born patriot. In his early age he had thrown the sweets given to him at school on Queen Victoria’s birthday into the dustbin. Later he asked his brother, “Why should we celebrate the birthday of Queen Victoria?” His life was full of many such incidents.
At an early age he associated himself with the nationalist movement. He joined Calcutta Medical College because Kolkata was the main centre of revolutionary activities. He worked with many great revolutionaries there. On return he worked for the freedom movement alongwith great leaders of that time. Handling the entire arrangements of the 1920 Nagpur Congress Session, Dr Hedgewar urged the Congress leaders to demand full independence. His plea was not accepted at that time. Later when the Congress passed the resolution of full independence at the Lahore Session of 1929, all the Sangh shakhas wrote letters of thanks to the Congress. Dr Hedgewar went to jail twice during the freedom movement as did several Swayamsevaks.
Dr Hedgewar was pained to see the country’s subjugation. That is why these words were spoken at the time of affirmation by Swayamsevaks: “I have become a Swayamsevak of the Sangh in order to make the country free.” The other thing which pained him was that the Hindu society had forgotten national self-respect and become defeatist and disunited. It was to correct this situation that the Sangh was formed with the aim of instilling the feelings of national self-respect, selflessness and unity in Hindu society.
This concept of Dr Hedgewar was the result of positive thinking. Its purpose was not to oppose someone. So, it would be against the basic principles of the organisation to term it anti-Muslim or anti-Christian. We often hear people prejudiced against any Hindu or nationalist organisation like the Sangh to describe it as “conservative” and “communal”. Due to Hindus being tolerant, all religions were welcomed in India. Their followers came here and settled. Some of them merged with the local culture and some retained their independent existence.
The Hindu believes that the manner in which rivers having different sources of origin merge with the sea, people following different paths merge into the creator of all. This view allowed people of different faiths to live in India. And this in turn led to the creation of a plural society. The pluralism we see today is not despite of but because of Hindus and Hinduism. If Hinduism were to be weakened, then neither India would remain India nor would pluralism survive. Can pluralism be imagined in Pakistan?
In this background the RSS is a national necessity of this country. Swayamsevaks of Sangh are discharging their national duty by organising Hindus. In the daily shakhas of the Sangh efforts are made to develop the body, mind and soul of Swayamsevaks and to instil national feelings in them.
After going through the prayer, pledge, solidarity source, solidarity mantra, which Swayamsevaks reiterate daily, one can understand the thoughts of the Sangh, what is taught in the Sangh and how the mind of Swayamsevaks works. Swayamsevaks worship the Motherland and pray for peace and prosperity of the nation. At the conclusion of every event, Swayamsevaks chant Bharatmata ki Jai. There is no room for caste, creed, provincialism, untouchability in the minds of Swayamsevaks.
Hence, at moments of crisis and in times of tragedy, Swayamsevaks do not bother about who are the victims. They are the first to organise relief work. This was evident during the devastating tsunami of 2004. Before that, Swayamsevaks were the first to reach out to the victims of the Super Cyclone in Odisha.
It would be worthwhile to remember that Swayamsevaks toiled day and night after two airliners crashed into each other, resulting in the death of more than 300 passengers. The accident occurred in Haryana. Nearly all the dead were Muslims, and Swayamsevaks recovered their bodies, put them into coffins and handed them over to their relatives who were provided with board and lodging. Later the Swayamsevaks were felicitated at the local masjid.
Whenever there is a natural disaster like an earthquake, floods or cyclone, Swayamsevaks across the country collect relief material and rush to the disaster site. Destroyed houses are rebuilt, ruined survivors are rehabilitated. The Swayamsevaks do all this and more because they see everybody in India as children of Bharat Mata and deserving of their assistance. Swayamsevaks who migrate to other countries carry this spirit of selfless service and sacrifice with them. The good work being done by the Swayamsevaks in Mauritius, Trinidad & Tobago, the US, Europe and across the world bears testimony to this fact.
Thousands of Swayamsevaks have mobilised resources and set up Seva Bharati, Seva Prakalp Sansthan, Banvasi Kalyan Ashram and various other trusts and institutions to look after the welfare of disadvantaged sections of our society. Their purpose is to instil self-confidence among the poor and the under-privileged, those living on the margins, by empowering them educationally and economically. The results of these initiatives have been spectacular.
The Swayamsevaks have in the forefront of organising civil support for the armed forces during wars and conflicts. Whether on the frontline or in cities, towns and villages, Swayamsevaks have toiled tirelessly during the 1947, 1962, 1965 and 1971 wars. They were also active during the Kargil conflict. Many Swayamsevaks have sacrificed their lives also. Others have suffered injuries. They have neither sought nor received either compensation or medals of bravery from the Government. For them it was service to the nation, to be performed with utmost dedication and without any selfish motives. It is such selfless service that makes the Sangh and its Swayamsevaks stand tall and proud.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is a national asset. It should be treasured and its services used for national reconstruction and making India stronger.
A lot more can be said about the good work being done by the Swayamsevaks and the Sangh, especially in the field of social reform and empowerment. This is being done without any publicity; often the Swayamsevaks remain in the background. That is the essence of selfless service. The Sangh is rooted in the soil of the motherland and seeks inspiration from its cultural identity and civilisational history. For the Sangh, the nation comes before everything else. Hence, Swayamsevaks dedicate their lives to the nation and toil for their selfless cause.
-- The writer is General Secretary, Organisation, of the BJP. He is a lifelong member of the RSS.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/290309/Dedicated-to-selfless-service.html
Faith, fact and fiction
October 21, 2010 7:57:55 PM
Prafull Goradia
History and ASI records prove Hindu temples have been vandalised time and again by Muslim rulers and invaders. Will Muslims consider returning all those mandirs to Hindus in exchange of the Babri Masjid?
The recent judgement of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on the Ram Janmabhoomi has been criticised by several Muslim leaders and a self-styled secularist as one based on faith and not facts. To insist on facts, when it comes to religion, is a contradiction in terms. That Virgin Mary was the mother of Jesus Christ is a belief inspired by faith and we respect it. Similarly, we do not question that Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven from the Dome of Rock.
The short-sightedness of the Muslim institutions wanting to appeal to the Supreme Court against the High Court’s recent judgement on Ram Janmabhoomi is obvious. In contrast, recall the vision of Sir Sikander Hayat Khan, the distinguished Premier of undivided Punjab: The Muslim League had sponsored the Punjab Muslim Mosques Protection Bill of 1938. The intention was primarily to secure the restoration of the Shaheed Ganj mosque, which was being used as a gurudwara.
As stated by Professor Coupland, the Bill was expected to create a grave political crisis for Sir Sikander’s Unionist Party. However, he still stood firm against the Bill and stated openly in the Punjab Assembly that the enactment of the legislation would provoke a retaliatory action in other provinces in respect of the numerous non-Muslim places of worship, which had passed into Muslim hands and had become sites of important Muslim holy places such as, the Dargah at Ajmer or the Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque near Qutb Minar.
Significantly, the Council of the Muslim League approved of Sir Sikander’s contention and the Punjab Governor accordingly, did not permit the Bill to be introduced. That left Barkat Ali, the sponsor of the Bill, disappointed. The incident is quoted from Modern Muslim India and the Birth of Pakistan by Mr SM Ikram.
As a Hindu, I welcome the insistence on facts. I could go to the extent of offering the Muslims the Babri masjid back provided their leaders agree to give back all the places of worship, which were proven mandirs and were converted into masjids by invaders or Muslim rulers.
I have seen and photographed several mosques whose walls carry integral carvings of Lord Ganesh. The Quwwat-ul-Islam in Delhi and the Adina Mosque near Malda in West Bengal are two such examples. The Jama Masjid in Vidisha near Bhopal is a veritable museum of Hindu idols. The Rudra Mahalaya Complex at Siddhpur in Gujarat with its 11 temples used as Jami Masjid is another interesting example. From within the precincts of the mosque, Hindu idols were excavated by the Archaeological Survey of India in 1979, but were buried back at the insistence of Muslim leaders. This incidence was reported by the Fourth National Minorities Commission Report, 1983. According to Alexander Cunningham, the legendary founder of ASI, it was the resplendent kingdom of Kannauj, which was later destroyed by Muhammad Ghori in 12th century.
In his Mathura : A District Memoir, FS Growse has recorded his exhaustive survey of Brajbhoomi. He was so overwhelmed by the vandalism that he visited the area repeatedly and recorded it in detail. To quote: “Thanks to Muhammadan intolerance, there is not a single building of any antiquity either in Mathura or, its environs. Its most famous temple — that dedicated to Kesava Deva (Krishna) — was destroyed in 1669, the eleventh year of the reign of Aurangzeb or Alamgir. The mosque (idgah) erected on its ruins is a building of little architectural value.”
Over two centuries after the desecration, Growse felt that “of all the sacred places in India, none enjoys a greater popularity than the capital of Braj, the holy city of Mathura. For nine months in the year, festival follows upon festival in rapid succession and the ghats and temples are daily thronged with new troops of way worn pilgrims”.
Today, Balkrishna is worshipped in a little room, which appears like a servant quarter attached to the back of the idgah. Definitely, any visitor, whether a devotee or otherwise, would feel pathetic.
The birthplace of Krishna was vandalised repeatedly. It started with Mahmud of Ghazni in 1017 and went on till Aurangzeb’s rule in 17th century. Historian Sri Ram Sharma in his The Religious Policy of the Mughal Emperors, first published in 1940, wrote: “Then came the turn of the temple of Keshav Rai at Mathura built at a cost of `33,00,000 by Rao Bir Singh Bundela during the reign of Jahangir. It had excited the envy of many Muslims who, however, had not Aurangzeb’s power. It had been built after the style of the famous temple at Bindraban which Man Singh had built at a cost of `5,00,000. But Bir Singh had improved upon his model and spent more than six times as much as Man Singh had lavished on his shrine at Bindraban. It had become a centre of pilgrimage for the whole of India. The idols, studded with precious stones and adorned with gold work, were all taken to Agra and there buried under the steps of Jahanara’s mosque. The temple was levelled to the ground and a mosque was ordered to be built on the site to mark the acquisition of religious merit by the emperor.” Historian Sharma has relied on Maasiri-i-Alamgiri.
The Russians at the end of their conquest of Warsaw had built an Orthodox church, which stood for a hundred years until World War I. It was demolished after the Polish takeover. At the same site, the Poles rebuilt their Catholic church. The incident was described by Sir Arnold Toynbee in the first Azad Memorial lecture delivered in Delhi. He then went on to comment on the irony of independent India tolerating the idgah over Krishna Janmabhoomi and the two tall mosques built on the ghats of Benares.
Ours being a peaceful society, Indians should avoid desecration. A fair and square exchange of the Babri edifice for all the mandirs turned into masjids, which authentic records prove, should be acceptable to all.
Prafull Goradia
History and ASI records prove Hindu temples have been vandalised time and again by Muslim rulers and invaders. Will Muslims consider returning all those mandirs to Hindus in exchange of the Babri Masjid?
The recent judgement of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on the Ram Janmabhoomi has been criticised by several Muslim leaders and a self-styled secularist as one based on faith and not facts. To insist on facts, when it comes to religion, is a contradiction in terms. That Virgin Mary was the mother of Jesus Christ is a belief inspired by faith and we respect it. Similarly, we do not question that Prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven from the Dome of Rock.
The short-sightedness of the Muslim institutions wanting to appeal to the Supreme Court against the High Court’s recent judgement on Ram Janmabhoomi is obvious. In contrast, recall the vision of Sir Sikander Hayat Khan, the distinguished Premier of undivided Punjab: The Muslim League had sponsored the Punjab Muslim Mosques Protection Bill of 1938. The intention was primarily to secure the restoration of the Shaheed Ganj mosque, which was being used as a gurudwara.
As stated by Professor Coupland, the Bill was expected to create a grave political crisis for Sir Sikander’s Unionist Party. However, he still stood firm against the Bill and stated openly in the Punjab Assembly that the enactment of the legislation would provoke a retaliatory action in other provinces in respect of the numerous non-Muslim places of worship, which had passed into Muslim hands and had become sites of important Muslim holy places such as, the Dargah at Ajmer or the Quwwat-ul-Islam Mosque near Qutb Minar.
Significantly, the Council of the Muslim League approved of Sir Sikander’s contention and the Punjab Governor accordingly, did not permit the Bill to be introduced. That left Barkat Ali, the sponsor of the Bill, disappointed. The incident is quoted from Modern Muslim India and the Birth of Pakistan by Mr SM Ikram.
As a Hindu, I welcome the insistence on facts. I could go to the extent of offering the Muslims the Babri masjid back provided their leaders agree to give back all the places of worship, which were proven mandirs and were converted into masjids by invaders or Muslim rulers.
I have seen and photographed several mosques whose walls carry integral carvings of Lord Ganesh. The Quwwat-ul-Islam in Delhi and the Adina Mosque near Malda in West Bengal are two such examples. The Jama Masjid in Vidisha near Bhopal is a veritable museum of Hindu idols. The Rudra Mahalaya Complex at Siddhpur in Gujarat with its 11 temples used as Jami Masjid is another interesting example. From within the precincts of the mosque, Hindu idols were excavated by the Archaeological Survey of India in 1979, but were buried back at the insistence of Muslim leaders. This incidence was reported by the Fourth National Minorities Commission Report, 1983. According to Alexander Cunningham, the legendary founder of ASI, it was the resplendent kingdom of Kannauj, which was later destroyed by Muhammad Ghori in 12th century.
In his Mathura : A District Memoir, FS Growse has recorded his exhaustive survey of Brajbhoomi. He was so overwhelmed by the vandalism that he visited the area repeatedly and recorded it in detail. To quote: “Thanks to Muhammadan intolerance, there is not a single building of any antiquity either in Mathura or, its environs. Its most famous temple — that dedicated to Kesava Deva (Krishna) — was destroyed in 1669, the eleventh year of the reign of Aurangzeb or Alamgir. The mosque (idgah) erected on its ruins is a building of little architectural value.”
Over two centuries after the desecration, Growse felt that “of all the sacred places in India, none enjoys a greater popularity than the capital of Braj, the holy city of Mathura. For nine months in the year, festival follows upon festival in rapid succession and the ghats and temples are daily thronged with new troops of way worn pilgrims”.
Today, Balkrishna is worshipped in a little room, which appears like a servant quarter attached to the back of the idgah. Definitely, any visitor, whether a devotee or otherwise, would feel pathetic.
The birthplace of Krishna was vandalised repeatedly. It started with Mahmud of Ghazni in 1017 and went on till Aurangzeb’s rule in 17th century. Historian Sri Ram Sharma in his The Religious Policy of the Mughal Emperors, first published in 1940, wrote: “Then came the turn of the temple of Keshav Rai at Mathura built at a cost of `33,00,000 by Rao Bir Singh Bundela during the reign of Jahangir. It had excited the envy of many Muslims who, however, had not Aurangzeb’s power. It had been built after the style of the famous temple at Bindraban which Man Singh had built at a cost of `5,00,000. But Bir Singh had improved upon his model and spent more than six times as much as Man Singh had lavished on his shrine at Bindraban. It had become a centre of pilgrimage for the whole of India. The idols, studded with precious stones and adorned with gold work, were all taken to Agra and there buried under the steps of Jahanara’s mosque. The temple was levelled to the ground and a mosque was ordered to be built on the site to mark the acquisition of religious merit by the emperor.” Historian Sharma has relied on Maasiri-i-Alamgiri.
The Russians at the end of their conquest of Warsaw had built an Orthodox church, which stood for a hundred years until World War I. It was demolished after the Polish takeover. At the same site, the Poles rebuilt their Catholic church. The incident was described by Sir Arnold Toynbee in the first Azad Memorial lecture delivered in Delhi. He then went on to comment on the irony of independent India tolerating the idgah over Krishna Janmabhoomi and the two tall mosques built on the ghats of Benares.
Ours being a peaceful society, Indians should avoid desecration. A fair and square exchange of the Babri edifice for all the mandirs turned into masjids, which authentic records prove, should be acceptable to all.
Resolve Ayodhya issue outside court: Pejawar seer
Resolve Ayodhya issue outside court: Pejawar seer
Staff Correspondent
‘It has been considered Ramajanmabhoomi for thousands of years'
Centre urged to enact a law for building
the temple
Udupi: Visvesha Tirtha Swamiji of Pejawar Math said on Friday that the Centre should take the initiative to resolve the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya through negotiations.
The swamiji, who is associated with the Ramjanmabhoomi movement here, told presspersons that he would soon write to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and All India Congress Committee president Sonia Gandhi on this issue. The Centre, under the then Prime Ministers V.P. Singh and Chandrashekhar, had taken the initiative in holding negotiations.
“It will be better if the matter is resolved through negotiations and Muslims give up the Ramjanmabhoomi area to Hindu organisations. The Muslims could build their mosque outside the disputed area. Let the mosque be neither too near the area nor too far from the area. This is a golden opportunity to promote communal harmony.”
The swamiji said the Allahabad High Court's verdict that the disputed area be divided into three parts was not acceptable. The land was Ramjanmabhoomi and its division was not acceptable. “The Centre should conduct negotiations and if the negotiations were successful, it should enact a law for the construction of the temple. Even if the negotiations failed, the Centre should still enact a law for the construction of the temple”, he said.
The swamiji said taking the matter to the Supreme Court would not serve any purpose. “However, since the Muslim organisations had decided to take the matter to the Supreme Court, the Hindu organisations would also challenge the matter there,” he said.
He said the Prathinidhi Mandal of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) would soon meet the Prime Minister on this issue. However, the swamiji parried questions on how the Muslim organisations could come for negotiations when he was leaving almost nothing for them to negotiate upon.
To a question, the swamiji said any judgment against the Hindu organisations on the Ramjanmabhoomi issue was not acceptable. “This is a matter of belief. The area has been regarded as Ramjanmabhoomi for thousands of years. This belief cannot be disregarded,” he said.
Defections
The swamiji said it was time the anti-defection law was amended to prevent all kinds of defections. The present situation in the State only showed that politicians were susceptible to corruption, greed, and money. “All the parties should come together and put an end to the politics of defection,” he said.
The swamiji said he would undertake a “padayatra” in the State against untouchability and to promote unity among Hindus.
http://www.hindu.com/2010/10/23/stories/2010102363300600.htm
Staff Correspondent
‘It has been considered Ramajanmabhoomi for thousands of years'
Centre urged to enact a law for building
the temple
Udupi: Visvesha Tirtha Swamiji of Pejawar Math said on Friday that the Centre should take the initiative to resolve the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya through negotiations.
The swamiji, who is associated with the Ramjanmabhoomi movement here, told presspersons that he would soon write to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and All India Congress Committee president Sonia Gandhi on this issue. The Centre, under the then Prime Ministers V.P. Singh and Chandrashekhar, had taken the initiative in holding negotiations.
“It will be better if the matter is resolved through negotiations and Muslims give up the Ramjanmabhoomi area to Hindu organisations. The Muslims could build their mosque outside the disputed area. Let the mosque be neither too near the area nor too far from the area. This is a golden opportunity to promote communal harmony.”
The swamiji said the Allahabad High Court's verdict that the disputed area be divided into three parts was not acceptable. The land was Ramjanmabhoomi and its division was not acceptable. “The Centre should conduct negotiations and if the negotiations were successful, it should enact a law for the construction of the temple. Even if the negotiations failed, the Centre should still enact a law for the construction of the temple”, he said.
The swamiji said taking the matter to the Supreme Court would not serve any purpose. “However, since the Muslim organisations had decided to take the matter to the Supreme Court, the Hindu organisations would also challenge the matter there,” he said.
He said the Prathinidhi Mandal of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) would soon meet the Prime Minister on this issue. However, the swamiji parried questions on how the Muslim organisations could come for negotiations when he was leaving almost nothing for them to negotiate upon.
To a question, the swamiji said any judgment against the Hindu organisations on the Ramjanmabhoomi issue was not acceptable. “This is a matter of belief. The area has been regarded as Ramjanmabhoomi for thousands of years. This belief cannot be disregarded,” he said.
Defections
The swamiji said it was time the anti-defection law was amended to prevent all kinds of defections. The present situation in the State only showed that politicians were susceptible to corruption, greed, and money. “All the parties should come together and put an end to the politics of defection,” he said.
The swamiji said he would undertake a “padayatra” in the State against untouchability and to promote unity among Hindus.
http://www.hindu.com/2010/10/23/stories/2010102363300600.htm
The big saffron roadblock
The big saffron roadblock
FAIZUR RAHMAN
If the Ayodhya dispute isn't to hold us back, the Centre must step up and act as a mediator For negotiations towards a compromise to happen, confidence-building measures are imperative insofar as the Muslims are concerned.
IN a calculated attempt to circumvent the Ayodhya verdict, Hindutva organisations have started issuing veiled threats (euphemistically called "ap called "appeals") to Muslims demanding that they hand over, for the construction of a "grand" Ram temple, the land allotted to them by the Allahabad high court. Surprisingly, the latest "appeal" comes from the Nirmohi Akhara, which until now had been genuinely engaged in negotiations initiated by Hashim Ansari, the oldest litigant on the Muslim side.
The truth is, if giving up a claim to the Ayodhya land was possible, it would have happened decades ago. It is only because the contending parties refused to budge from their respective positions was it decided that exploring the legal option was the best alternative to a negotiated agreement. Sadly, it was not to be; the judgment, by granting legitimacy to the faith of one community, nullified the efforts to break the deadlock and resulted in a mutually hurting stalemate once again. The only option left before the parties now is to shed their adversarial approach and arrive at a compromise formula through negotiations.
For this to happen, confidencebuilding measures are imperative insofar as the Muslims are concerned. The Hindutva parivar, in the spirit of reconciliation it is talking about, must take the first step by announcing its willingness to relinquish any claim on other mosques in the country. Such a magnanimous gesture would be seen as upholding the concept of democratic fair dealing and pave the way for a negotiated settlement of the dispute. And now that all the parties have decided to move the Supreme Court, it would restore the confidence of the minorities were the apex court to assure them that the Allahabad high court verdict would not set a precedent for the takeover of their places of worship by the majority community.
As for the Sunni Central Wa kf Board, although it may go against their claim to ownership of the entire disputed land, it should not be difficult for them to enter into a harmonious agreement with the Hindus, as such a precedent exists in Islamic history — in the form of the Hudaybiya Tr eaty, which was signed with the Meccan polytheists by no less a person than the Prophet himself, despite the fact that it was opposed by the entire Muslim community at that time. It is hoped that in the interest of peace the Muslim leadership would follow the farsighted approach of the Prophet to resolve this seemingly intractable conflict.
But the problem is, these sentiments are not being reciprocated by the other side. Hindutva ideologues are displaying a kind of majoritanian masculinity that seems to suggest that it is below their dignity to treat the
Muslims as equal citizens of this country. The demolition of the Babri Masjid is being justified by saying that it was not a mosque at all. And the latest innuendo is that a mosque is less sacred than a temple, and hence it may be demolished to make way for a holier place, the Ram Te mple . Persons spreading such disinformation must realise that it has the potential to disturb the remarkable Hindu-Muslim harmony that exists at the peopleto-people level in India .
If the Sangh Parivar is honest the Ayodhya issue can be easily resolved on the basis of the values that Islam and Hinduism share. For instance, the idea of unity despite religious diversity is not against the Muslim ethos as, unlike Hindutva, Islam does not belittle the sanctity of places of worship of other religions.
In a verse which could be described as the bedrock of inter-faith harmony the Koran says that if God did not check the mischief-mongers “there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues
and mosques where the name of e God in commemorated in abundant o measure" (22:40). And it has been f declared in the Bhagavad Gita that o an absence of enmity for people (nirt vairah sarvabhutesu), even though t they might have done great harm, is b one of the important virtues of the h best of the devotees (XI-55). g Having said this, it may be mis p leading to see the Ayodhya dispute as purely a Hindu-Muslim issue. It actually concerns the entire nation, and could seriously affect its devel opment if allowed to continue. It is common knowledge that poverty and backwardness in many African countries is mainly a result of continuous violent internal conflict.
And nearer home, one of our own neighbours finds itself in deep trouble, financial and otherwise, for failing to contain sectarian violence, and in some cases promoting it as a matter of policy to further its vested interests.
Therefore, if the Central government wants India to maintain its position as one of the fastest-growing economies in the world, it must assume the role of a genuine mediator to help resolve this dispute amicably.
The Sangh Parivar, too, must realise that it would be unwise to prolong this conflict at a time when all our energies are required to be focused on the equitable distribution of the fruits of our economic growth. In other words, we need to go beyond the idea of conflict resolution into the realm of conflict transformation, by which both the communities join hands to work towards the larger goal of making India an epitome of peace, stability and progress.
The author is secretary general of the Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought among Muslims
http://epaper.indianexpress.com/IE/IEH/2010/10/21/INDEX.SHTML
FAIZUR RAHMAN
If the Ayodhya dispute isn't to hold us back, the Centre must step up and act as a mediator For negotiations towards a compromise to happen, confidence-building measures are imperative insofar as the Muslims are concerned.
IN a calculated attempt to circumvent the Ayodhya verdict, Hindutva organisations have started issuing veiled threats (euphemistically called "ap called "appeals") to Muslims demanding that they hand over, for the construction of a "grand" Ram temple, the land allotted to them by the Allahabad high court. Surprisingly, the latest "appeal" comes from the Nirmohi Akhara, which until now had been genuinely engaged in negotiations initiated by Hashim Ansari, the oldest litigant on the Muslim side.
The truth is, if giving up a claim to the Ayodhya land was possible, it would have happened decades ago. It is only because the contending parties refused to budge from their respective positions was it decided that exploring the legal option was the best alternative to a negotiated agreement. Sadly, it was not to be; the judgment, by granting legitimacy to the faith of one community, nullified the efforts to break the deadlock and resulted in a mutually hurting stalemate once again. The only option left before the parties now is to shed their adversarial approach and arrive at a compromise formula through negotiations.
For this to happen, confidencebuilding measures are imperative insofar as the Muslims are concerned. The Hindutva parivar, in the spirit of reconciliation it is talking about, must take the first step by announcing its willingness to relinquish any claim on other mosques in the country. Such a magnanimous gesture would be seen as upholding the concept of democratic fair dealing and pave the way for a negotiated settlement of the dispute. And now that all the parties have decided to move the Supreme Court, it would restore the confidence of the minorities were the apex court to assure them that the Allahabad high court verdict would not set a precedent for the takeover of their places of worship by the majority community.
As for the Sunni Central Wa kf Board, although it may go against their claim to ownership of the entire disputed land, it should not be difficult for them to enter into a harmonious agreement with the Hindus, as such a precedent exists in Islamic history — in the form of the Hudaybiya Tr eaty, which was signed with the Meccan polytheists by no less a person than the Prophet himself, despite the fact that it was opposed by the entire Muslim community at that time. It is hoped that in the interest of peace the Muslim leadership would follow the farsighted approach of the Prophet to resolve this seemingly intractable conflict.
But the problem is, these sentiments are not being reciprocated by the other side. Hindutva ideologues are displaying a kind of majoritanian masculinity that seems to suggest that it is below their dignity to treat the
Muslims as equal citizens of this country. The demolition of the Babri Masjid is being justified by saying that it was not a mosque at all. And the latest innuendo is that a mosque is less sacred than a temple, and hence it may be demolished to make way for a holier place, the Ram Te mple . Persons spreading such disinformation must realise that it has the potential to disturb the remarkable Hindu-Muslim harmony that exists at the peopleto-people level in India .
If the Sangh Parivar is honest the Ayodhya issue can be easily resolved on the basis of the values that Islam and Hinduism share. For instance, the idea of unity despite religious diversity is not against the Muslim ethos as, unlike Hindutva, Islam does not belittle the sanctity of places of worship of other religions.
In a verse which could be described as the bedrock of inter-faith harmony the Koran says that if God did not check the mischief-mongers “there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues
and mosques where the name of e God in commemorated in abundant o measure" (22:40). And it has been f declared in the Bhagavad Gita that o an absence of enmity for people (nirt vairah sarvabhutesu), even though t they might have done great harm, is b one of the important virtues of the h best of the devotees (XI-55). g Having said this, it may be mis p leading to see the Ayodhya dispute as purely a Hindu-Muslim issue. It actually concerns the entire nation, and could seriously affect its devel opment if allowed to continue. It is common knowledge that poverty and backwardness in many African countries is mainly a result of continuous violent internal conflict.
And nearer home, one of our own neighbours finds itself in deep trouble, financial and otherwise, for failing to contain sectarian violence, and in some cases promoting it as a matter of policy to further its vested interests.
Therefore, if the Central government wants India to maintain its position as one of the fastest-growing economies in the world, it must assume the role of a genuine mediator to help resolve this dispute amicably.
The Sangh Parivar, too, must realise that it would be unwise to prolong this conflict at a time when all our energies are required to be focused on the equitable distribution of the fruits of our economic growth. In other words, we need to go beyond the idea of conflict resolution into the realm of conflict transformation, by which both the communities join hands to work towards the larger goal of making India an epitome of peace, stability and progress.
The author is secretary general of the Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought among Muslims
http://epaper.indianexpress.com/IE/IEH/2010/10/21/INDEX.SHTML
Sunday, October 17, 2010
And justice for all
And justice for all
S Gurumurthy
But on one of the shiniest days in the history of free India our media pundits plumbed the depths of trivia
My judgment is short, very short,” writes a relieved and happy Justice SU Khan, who delivered the Ayodhya verdict along with Justices S Agarwal and DV Sharma. But that “short, very short” judgment itself runs to 285 pages. The order of Justice S Agarwal, with annexes, runs to over, believe it, 5,200 pages; that of Justice DV Sharma tops over 1,700 pages, including annexes. It means this: to get a basic idea of the Ayodhya judgment one has to wade through some 8,000 pages.
This long judgment may well enter the Guinness book as the longest judgment ever written! But, what the visual media and the participants in its debate had in their hands when they enlightened the nation for almost four hours was a one-page summary of Justice Khan’s order; a two-page summary of Justice Sharma’s; and a 12-page summary of Justice Agarwal’s. Yet, in a couple of hours they settled the national opinion on the long judgment of 8,000 pages.
The “quality” of their discourse was self-evident, even self-serving. The visual media continuously ran headlines like “no temple was demolished to build mosque”, when the majority finding on the issue, by Justices Agarwal (p5083) and Sharma (p28-104 in Waqf Board Suit) was that the mosque “had been constructed on the site of the Hindu temple after demolishing the same”; the judges had found that the Hindus had for long worshipped the place where the mosque stood as Ram Janmabhoomi (Sharma p172 Hindu Suit and Agarwal p5085).
Most media projected Justice Sharma’s views as minority view. Actually it is Justice Khan’s that turns out to be that way, except on the division of the disputed area where Justice Agarwal partly agrees with him. But, on the issue of the broken temple predating the mosque and on the belief of the Hindus about the birthplace of lord Ram, Justices Agarwal and Sharma constitute the majority. Even Justice Khan does not deny the existence of the broken temple but says that the mosque was built on temple ruins.
Again, the media did not highlight that the two Justices have dismissed the suits of the Sunni Waqf Board and the Nirmohi Akhara (believed to be the proxy for the Congress party); and also that the two Justices have decreed only the two suits filed by the Hindu parties. The consequence of this is immense.
The discourse on the visual media was less about the judgment and more about politics like whether the Court was right on deciding religious issues like whether it was Ram Janmasthan or there was a temple under the mosque. The media also wailed about why the nation should be wasting time on the temple issue when developmental issues are crying attention. Each of these comments is valid in itself; but they are no substitute for rigorous analysis of the verdict. Almost all commentators recalled the 1992 demolition, but did not say that Justice Agarwal (page 586) has concluded that that did not affect the rights of the Muslims in their suit. With the result, the millions who witnessed the TV channels did not get the right idea about the judgment; they got instead a distorted view of it. But they got the usual, and more, dose of lectures on “secularism”.
And most of the commentators were elated over the “statesmanship” in giving a third of the disputed place to Muslims. But they did not stop a minute to ask (unlike legal experts Rajeev Dhawan, regarded as a secular icon, and PP Rao did) how, after saying that the Muslims and Nirmohi Akhara had no right to sue, the two judges could give any share of the property to them. Political parties need votes; so they would speak only with that in view. But should these experts and intellectuals not call a spade a spade? Also point out what the Court has actually found as facts? They didn’t. Therefore, the start of a national discourse on such a critical legal issue, with huge political and communal implications in future, could not have been shallower. More. For the last 20 years all political parties and secular intellectuals had told those who were for the Ram temple and those against to wait for the judicial verdict for resolving the dispute. Now move on to know whether the verdict achieves that objective.
Without knowing who were the parties to the litigation, who has won and who has lost and what the verdict says cannot be deciphered. There were four suits in all before the judges — two by Hindu parties; one by Muslims (Sunni Waqf Board); and the third, widely believed to be the proxy of the Congress (Nirmohi Akhara). Some 121 issues were framed in the suits — like whether the Mosque was constructed on a temple demolished or in ruins; whether the Hindus had a long held belief that the disputed place was the birthplace of lord Ram; whether the four suits were within the period of limitation set by law; whether and how long the Hindus were worshipping at the disputed place; whether the Muslims were also worshipping in that place and from when to when; who owns the disputed land, the Waqf, Nirmohi Akhara, or the deity Ram. And so on.
While the Hindus’ suit had claimed the Janmasthan as exclusively that of the deity Ram, the Sunni Waqf Board suit had claimed it as exclusively its own. Nirmohi Akhara suit had claimed it again as its exclusive property. In law, this mutually exclusive claim of the three contenders meant that, if the suit of any one was allowed that would destroy the suit of the other two. This was how the cases, three of which were filed in 1989, the first one by the Hindus having been filed in 1950, began with the parties letting in oral and documentary evidence first and then arguing the case latter. The principal issue in the case was: whether the disputed place belonged to the deity Ram, or the Mosque or the Nirmohi Akhara.
To decide this, the critical fact to be found was whether a Hindu temple predating the disputed Mosque existed. To unravel that the Allahabad High Court had directed the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to find out “whether there was any temple/structure which was demolished and mosque constructed on the disputed site” first by Ground Penetrating Radar (GRP) survey and, thereafter, by excavation. The ASI conducted the GRP survey and submitted a report in February 2003; after that it excavated the disputed area and submitted a further report of 574 pages. What was ASI’s answer to the all-important question of temple under the mosque? How have the three judges decided the cases? What are the legal, political implications of the decision? These questions call for a clinical dissection of the 8000-page verdict. That will reveal whether the verdict solves the dispute, or escalates it.
comment@gurumurthy.net
http://www.dailypioneer.com/287019/And-justice-for-all.html
S Gurumurthy
But on one of the shiniest days in the history of free India our media pundits plumbed the depths of trivia
My judgment is short, very short,” writes a relieved and happy Justice SU Khan, who delivered the Ayodhya verdict along with Justices S Agarwal and DV Sharma. But that “short, very short” judgment itself runs to 285 pages. The order of Justice S Agarwal, with annexes, runs to over, believe it, 5,200 pages; that of Justice DV Sharma tops over 1,700 pages, including annexes. It means this: to get a basic idea of the Ayodhya judgment one has to wade through some 8,000 pages.
This long judgment may well enter the Guinness book as the longest judgment ever written! But, what the visual media and the participants in its debate had in their hands when they enlightened the nation for almost four hours was a one-page summary of Justice Khan’s order; a two-page summary of Justice Sharma’s; and a 12-page summary of Justice Agarwal’s. Yet, in a couple of hours they settled the national opinion on the long judgment of 8,000 pages.
The “quality” of their discourse was self-evident, even self-serving. The visual media continuously ran headlines like “no temple was demolished to build mosque”, when the majority finding on the issue, by Justices Agarwal (p5083) and Sharma (p28-104 in Waqf Board Suit) was that the mosque “had been constructed on the site of the Hindu temple after demolishing the same”; the judges had found that the Hindus had for long worshipped the place where the mosque stood as Ram Janmabhoomi (Sharma p172 Hindu Suit and Agarwal p5085).
Most media projected Justice Sharma’s views as minority view. Actually it is Justice Khan’s that turns out to be that way, except on the division of the disputed area where Justice Agarwal partly agrees with him. But, on the issue of the broken temple predating the mosque and on the belief of the Hindus about the birthplace of lord Ram, Justices Agarwal and Sharma constitute the majority. Even Justice Khan does not deny the existence of the broken temple but says that the mosque was built on temple ruins.
Again, the media did not highlight that the two Justices have dismissed the suits of the Sunni Waqf Board and the Nirmohi Akhara (believed to be the proxy for the Congress party); and also that the two Justices have decreed only the two suits filed by the Hindu parties. The consequence of this is immense.
The discourse on the visual media was less about the judgment and more about politics like whether the Court was right on deciding religious issues like whether it was Ram Janmasthan or there was a temple under the mosque. The media also wailed about why the nation should be wasting time on the temple issue when developmental issues are crying attention. Each of these comments is valid in itself; but they are no substitute for rigorous analysis of the verdict. Almost all commentators recalled the 1992 demolition, but did not say that Justice Agarwal (page 586) has concluded that that did not affect the rights of the Muslims in their suit. With the result, the millions who witnessed the TV channels did not get the right idea about the judgment; they got instead a distorted view of it. But they got the usual, and more, dose of lectures on “secularism”.
And most of the commentators were elated over the “statesmanship” in giving a third of the disputed place to Muslims. But they did not stop a minute to ask (unlike legal experts Rajeev Dhawan, regarded as a secular icon, and PP Rao did) how, after saying that the Muslims and Nirmohi Akhara had no right to sue, the two judges could give any share of the property to them. Political parties need votes; so they would speak only with that in view. But should these experts and intellectuals not call a spade a spade? Also point out what the Court has actually found as facts? They didn’t. Therefore, the start of a national discourse on such a critical legal issue, with huge political and communal implications in future, could not have been shallower. More. For the last 20 years all political parties and secular intellectuals had told those who were for the Ram temple and those against to wait for the judicial verdict for resolving the dispute. Now move on to know whether the verdict achieves that objective.
Without knowing who were the parties to the litigation, who has won and who has lost and what the verdict says cannot be deciphered. There were four suits in all before the judges — two by Hindu parties; one by Muslims (Sunni Waqf Board); and the third, widely believed to be the proxy of the Congress (Nirmohi Akhara). Some 121 issues were framed in the suits — like whether the Mosque was constructed on a temple demolished or in ruins; whether the Hindus had a long held belief that the disputed place was the birthplace of lord Ram; whether the four suits were within the period of limitation set by law; whether and how long the Hindus were worshipping at the disputed place; whether the Muslims were also worshipping in that place and from when to when; who owns the disputed land, the Waqf, Nirmohi Akhara, or the deity Ram. And so on.
While the Hindus’ suit had claimed the Janmasthan as exclusively that of the deity Ram, the Sunni Waqf Board suit had claimed it as exclusively its own. Nirmohi Akhara suit had claimed it again as its exclusive property. In law, this mutually exclusive claim of the three contenders meant that, if the suit of any one was allowed that would destroy the suit of the other two. This was how the cases, three of which were filed in 1989, the first one by the Hindus having been filed in 1950, began with the parties letting in oral and documentary evidence first and then arguing the case latter. The principal issue in the case was: whether the disputed place belonged to the deity Ram, or the Mosque or the Nirmohi Akhara.
To decide this, the critical fact to be found was whether a Hindu temple predating the disputed Mosque existed. To unravel that the Allahabad High Court had directed the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to find out “whether there was any temple/structure which was demolished and mosque constructed on the disputed site” first by Ground Penetrating Radar (GRP) survey and, thereafter, by excavation. The ASI conducted the GRP survey and submitted a report in February 2003; after that it excavated the disputed area and submitted a further report of 574 pages. What was ASI’s answer to the all-important question of temple under the mosque? How have the three judges decided the cases? What are the legal, political implications of the decision? These questions call for a clinical dissection of the 8000-page verdict. That will reveal whether the verdict solves the dispute, or escalates it.
comment@gurumurthy.net
http://www.dailypioneer.com/287019/And-justice-for-all.html
What Anti-Defection Law say
s
J. Venkatesan
The 10th Schedule to the Constitution, popularly referred to as the ‘Anti-Defection Law,' was inserted by the 52nd Amendment in 1985.
The grounds of disqualification are specified in Paragraph 2 of the 10th Schedule.
A member would incur a disqualification under paragraph 2 (1) (a) when he “voluntarily gives up his membership of a party” and under 2 (1) (b) when he/she votes (or abstains from voting) contrary to the directive issued by the party.
Two important questions arise in this regard: what would constitute the member ‘voluntarily' giving up of membership of a party? And, what is the full import of 2 (1) (b), wherein voting/abstention from voting against the party is mentioned?
The Supreme Court, in the Ravi Naik vs. Union of India case, has interpreted the phrase ‘voluntarily gives up his membership.' It says: “The words ‘voluntarily gives up his membership' are not synonymous with ‘resignation' and have a wider connotation. A person may voluntarily give up his membership of a political party even though he has not tendered his resignation from the membership of that party.
“Even in the absence of a formal resignation from membership, an inference can be drawn from the conduct of a member that he has voluntarily given up his membership of the political party to which he belongs.”
In another judgment in the case of Rajendra Singh Rana vs. Swami Prasad Maurya and Others, the Supreme Court held that the act of giving a letter requesting the Governor to call upon the leader of the other side to form a Government itself would amount to an act of voluntarily giving up membership of the party on whose ticket the said members had got elected.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article825476.ece
J. Venkatesan
The 10th Schedule to the Constitution, popularly referred to as the ‘Anti-Defection Law,' was inserted by the 52nd Amendment in 1985.
The grounds of disqualification are specified in Paragraph 2 of the 10th Schedule.
A member would incur a disqualification under paragraph 2 (1) (a) when he “voluntarily gives up his membership of a party” and under 2 (1) (b) when he/she votes (or abstains from voting) contrary to the directive issued by the party.
Two important questions arise in this regard: what would constitute the member ‘voluntarily' giving up of membership of a party? And, what is the full import of 2 (1) (b), wherein voting/abstention from voting against the party is mentioned?
The Supreme Court, in the Ravi Naik vs. Union of India case, has interpreted the phrase ‘voluntarily gives up his membership.' It says: “The words ‘voluntarily gives up his membership' are not synonymous with ‘resignation' and have a wider connotation. A person may voluntarily give up his membership of a political party even though he has not tendered his resignation from the membership of that party.
“Even in the absence of a formal resignation from membership, an inference can be drawn from the conduct of a member that he has voluntarily given up his membership of the political party to which he belongs.”
In another judgment in the case of Rajendra Singh Rana vs. Swami Prasad Maurya and Others, the Supreme Court held that the act of giving a letter requesting the Governor to call upon the leader of the other side to form a Government itself would amount to an act of voluntarily giving up membership of the party on whose ticket the said members had got elected.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article825476.ece
Babri Masjid Revisited
Maulana Wahiduddin Khan,
Oct 12, 2010,
The Babri masjid was built in 1528 at Ayodhya by Mir Baqi, the governor of Ayodhya at the time. He built it adjacent to the Ram chabutra, which is held sacred by the Hindus. This was a clear deviation from the Islamic principle. According to Islam, the places of worship of two religions should be built at a considerable distance from each other.
When Caliph Omar visited Jerusalem in AD 638, he wanted to offer his prayers. At that moment, he happened to be in the Church of the Resurrection of Jerusalem. The Christian bishop told him he could offer his prayers inside that very church. But the caliph refused. He said that he would offer his prayers at a stone's throw from the church. If he offered his prayers right there inside the church, it would create a controversy in the future. The Muslims of later generations would say that they would build a mosque there because their caliph had offered prayers there. Notwithstanding this historic example, Mir Baqi built a mosque adjoining a Hindu sacred place. This was bound to create problems.
In 1949, some Hindus placed three idols inside the Babri mosque. Unable to manage the crisis this created, the Muslims reacted: their failure to adopt the prophetic principle in this regard started an unending controversy between the two communities.
At the time of the Prophet, in the first quarter of the 7th century AD, idol worshippers had placed 360 idols in the premises of the Kabah, Mecca. But the Prophet never reacted. He simply ignored the situation and tried to change people's hearts. And the result was that, within 20 years, Meccans abandoned idol worship and became the followers of the Prophet. Then those Meccans themselves removed the idols from the Kabah without any confrontation or bloodshed.
In 1991, during the prime ministership of Narasimha Rao, the Indian Parliament passed a legislation called the Places of Worship Act, 1991. According to this Act, the government of India was bound to maintain the status quo of all places of worship on the Indian soil as it stood in 1947. But there was an exception that of the Babri masjid of Ayodhya. The Act maintained that the Babri masjid issue was in court, so the government would wait and it would be its duty to implement the verdict of the court when it was given.
This Act was a most reasonable one and Muslims should have accepted it as such. But they rejected it outright and resorted to street demonstrations. The demolition of the Babri masjid on December 6, 1992, was nothing but the culmination of this negative course of action adopted by the Muslims. At that time i said: "Babri Masjid ko Hinduon ne toda aur Musalmano ne usko tudwaya." (The Hindus demolished the Babri masjid but Muslims provoked them to do so.)
The Muslims subsequently took the very impractical line that the masjid should be rebuilt on the same spot. At that time, i said that the rebuilding formula was totally unrealistic; Muslims should accept the alternative formula of the relocation of the mosque.
It is a well-known fact that the relocation formula has been adopted by Arab countries. When these countries wanted to replan their cities, they found that there were many mosques that were obstacles to city planning. They did not hesitate to relocate such mosques. I said at the time that Muslims in India ought to adopt this same formula and accept the relocation of the Babri mosque. But again the Muslims refused.
Now, after the judicial verdict on September 30, 2010, the Muslims are generally saying that this verdict is contrary to their hopes and they will challenge it in the Supreme Court. But this is not going to solve the problem. It is an emotional reaction to the verdict and not a well-considered response.
Suppose the Muslims refer the issue to the Supreme Court and suppose it issues a judgement in their favour. Even then it will not solve the problem. The Muslims themselves set a precedent in 1985, which is enough to predict the situation as it will unfold.
In 1985, the Supreme Court issued a judgement in the Shah Bano case, which ran counter to Muslim aspirations. So the Muslims refused to accept the judgement. They took to the streets and the government was compelled to pass a new Act. The Hindus would certainly say that it was now their turn to refuse the verdict issued by the Supreme Court.
The only solution to this problem is for the Muslims to decide to put a full stop to this issue. If they put a comma, then there will be no end to it. We have lost 60 years by putting comma after comma and now this is the last chance to bring closure to the issue so that the relationship between the Hindus and the Muslims may be normalised. And this full stop means either leaving it to the government to implement the verdict or agreeing to the relocation of the Babri mosque. There is, in reality, no third option.
The writer is an Islamic scholar.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6730622.cms?prtpage=1#ixzz12DbVtH5d
Kashmir: Integral truths
S.K. Sinha
Oct 13 2010
No chief minister started his tenure with so much goodwill within his state and all over the country as Omar Abdullah in 2009. It is a pity that this was frittered away in so short a time, thanks first to the flip-flop over the so-called Shopian rape and murder case in 2009 and to the stone-pelting in 2010. Having interacted with his legendary grandfather, and more closely with his father, I had earnestly wished that he be successful.
Nowadays we do not have political leaders like Lal Bahadur Shastri who as railway minister resigned owning moral responsibility for a major train disaster. The trend now is to disown responsibility and pass the buck. We need not hold against Omar his version of events in his address to the state legislature on October 6. I would even praise him for boldly asserting that he is not a puppet of the Centre, often alleged by separatists in the Valley for CMs of the state. As a duly elected CM, he functioned with due independence. Yet there are two facts which cannot be ignored. Till the evening before Omar was sworn in as CM, it was being said that the party preferred his father for the job. Farooq Abdullah categorically stated on a media channel that he would be taking the oath as CM next morning. Something happened in Delhi that night and Omar became CM the following day. During the stone-pelting crisis, there was widespread opinion in the state and outside that Farooq would not have allowed things to go out of control. It was widely felt that Omar must go, but he survived because of a lone helpline from Delhi.
One should make allowances for Omar being young with little experience in state politics. In 2008, his uncalled for and misleading emotional outburst in Parliament during the Amarnath controversy — “Jaan Denge par Zamin nahin Denge” — only fuelled the agitation in Jammu. He must have been under tremendous strain for the past few months and this should not be ignored while commenting on his recent address to the Assembly. However, some of the issues raised by him are disturbing from the national viewpoint. The record must be set right. Pandering to separatist sentiments will not help build political support. It will only whet the appetite for secession.
Omar’s statement that Kashmir acceded to India and, unlike Hyderabad and Junagadh, did not merge with India, has an unfortunate connotation. Over 500 Princely States merged with India. Mentioning only Hyderabad and Junagadh is making insinuations, in line with Pakistan propaganda. There was a common Instrument of Accession for all Princely States acceding to India. Hari Singh was facing a very critical situation. Pakistani invaders were approaching Srinagar and he had fled to Jammu. He desperately needed India’s help and was hardly in a position to make any stipulations. He duly signed the instrument. This was fully supported by Sheikh Abdullah, the most popular leader of Kashmir. Later, it was also ratified by the Kashmir Constituent Assembly. At the time of signing the Instrument of Accession, letters were exchanged between the Maharaja and Mountbatten in which special provisions were sought and accepted. Letters do not have the same legal validity as a formal instrument. Yet Article 370 of the Constitution ensures that the provisions agreed upon were duly upheld. In these circumstances, the hair-splitting distinction between accession and merger is meaningless. It may be mentioned that in the earlier two centuries many Princely States, including Kashmir, acceded to the British Crown but the people of those states were not given British nationality. It was refreshing that during the nuclear debate in Parliament in 2008, Omar rightly won accolade for asserting his Indian nationality.
Omar’s irritation over Kashmir being described as an integral part of India was uncalled for. That has been our national stand and not that of any particular party as such. Neither his father nor his grandfather ever contested this. On February 22, 1994 the Indian Parliament passed a unanimous resolution asserting that Kashmir is an integral part of India and directing that Kashmir territory illegally occupied by Pakistan be liberated. The National Conference representative in Parliament supported that resolution.
Much is being made by Omar and his party of autonomy. The fact is that Kashmir enjoys more autonomy than any state in India but has the least autonomy below the state level. A regional political imbalance persists and is sought to be perpetuated by the embargo on delimitation of constituencies. For 49,725 voters, Kashmir has one MLA but Jammu has one MLA for 66,521 voters. This means that despite having 1,77,153 more voters, Jammu has nine MLAs less in the legislature than Kashmir. Whereas Panchayat Raj functions in every state, it is yet to be established in J&K. The Right to Information Act has not yet been made fully functional in the state. In the name of autonomy a reversion to the pre-1953 constitutional status is sought. This will entail removal of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the Election Commission and the Comptroller and Auditor General. There is also a demand for an elected governor from the state and doing away with IAS, IPS and other Central services. The changes effected through due process of law prescribed by the Constitution, and ratified by the state legislature, are sought to be scrapped in the name of autonomy. These changes were endorsed by the Indira-Sheikh accord. They also received the people’s support in the Sheikh’s overwhelming victory in the 1977 state elections, regarded by all as free and fair. It is strange that Sheikh Abdullah’s progenies, who attained political power for being his descendants, now want to undo what he did in the interests of the state and are chasing a mirage of autonomy. It is also pertinent that Central per capita aid is the highest in Kashmir, many times more than some other states in the country. Removal of the jurisdiction of the Comptroller and Auditor General would mean absence of financial accountability. Omar has sought regional autonomy for Jammu and Ladakh regions and has urged splitting them into sub-regions of Jammu, Rajouri, Poonch, Doda, Kargil and Leh, which would virtually be a division on communal lines. It is interesting that the Valley is not required to be split into the plains and mountain regions, obviously because of commonalty of religion.
The need in J&K is to restore order, remove governance deficit, commence political dialogue and meet the legitimate aspirations of all stakeholders in the state, within the framework of the Indian Constitution. It must not be lost sight of that the separatists constitute a minority in the state. Their influence is generally confined to the Valley, excluding the Gujjars and Bakherwals, living in the mountains. The recent stone-pelting agitation was confined to the Valley, without any Gujjar or Bakherwal participation.
- The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/dc-comment/kashmir-integral-truths-134
Oct 13 2010
No chief minister started his tenure with so much goodwill within his state and all over the country as Omar Abdullah in 2009. It is a pity that this was frittered away in so short a time, thanks first to the flip-flop over the so-called Shopian rape and murder case in 2009 and to the stone-pelting in 2010. Having interacted with his legendary grandfather, and more closely with his father, I had earnestly wished that he be successful.
Nowadays we do not have political leaders like Lal Bahadur Shastri who as railway minister resigned owning moral responsibility for a major train disaster. The trend now is to disown responsibility and pass the buck. We need not hold against Omar his version of events in his address to the state legislature on October 6. I would even praise him for boldly asserting that he is not a puppet of the Centre, often alleged by separatists in the Valley for CMs of the state. As a duly elected CM, he functioned with due independence. Yet there are two facts which cannot be ignored. Till the evening before Omar was sworn in as CM, it was being said that the party preferred his father for the job. Farooq Abdullah categorically stated on a media channel that he would be taking the oath as CM next morning. Something happened in Delhi that night and Omar became CM the following day. During the stone-pelting crisis, there was widespread opinion in the state and outside that Farooq would not have allowed things to go out of control. It was widely felt that Omar must go, but he survived because of a lone helpline from Delhi.
One should make allowances for Omar being young with little experience in state politics. In 2008, his uncalled for and misleading emotional outburst in Parliament during the Amarnath controversy — “Jaan Denge par Zamin nahin Denge” — only fuelled the agitation in Jammu. He must have been under tremendous strain for the past few months and this should not be ignored while commenting on his recent address to the Assembly. However, some of the issues raised by him are disturbing from the national viewpoint. The record must be set right. Pandering to separatist sentiments will not help build political support. It will only whet the appetite for secession.
Omar’s statement that Kashmir acceded to India and, unlike Hyderabad and Junagadh, did not merge with India, has an unfortunate connotation. Over 500 Princely States merged with India. Mentioning only Hyderabad and Junagadh is making insinuations, in line with Pakistan propaganda. There was a common Instrument of Accession for all Princely States acceding to India. Hari Singh was facing a very critical situation. Pakistani invaders were approaching Srinagar and he had fled to Jammu. He desperately needed India’s help and was hardly in a position to make any stipulations. He duly signed the instrument. This was fully supported by Sheikh Abdullah, the most popular leader of Kashmir. Later, it was also ratified by the Kashmir Constituent Assembly. At the time of signing the Instrument of Accession, letters were exchanged between the Maharaja and Mountbatten in which special provisions were sought and accepted. Letters do not have the same legal validity as a formal instrument. Yet Article 370 of the Constitution ensures that the provisions agreed upon were duly upheld. In these circumstances, the hair-splitting distinction between accession and merger is meaningless. It may be mentioned that in the earlier two centuries many Princely States, including Kashmir, acceded to the British Crown but the people of those states were not given British nationality. It was refreshing that during the nuclear debate in Parliament in 2008, Omar rightly won accolade for asserting his Indian nationality.
Omar’s irritation over Kashmir being described as an integral part of India was uncalled for. That has been our national stand and not that of any particular party as such. Neither his father nor his grandfather ever contested this. On February 22, 1994 the Indian Parliament passed a unanimous resolution asserting that Kashmir is an integral part of India and directing that Kashmir territory illegally occupied by Pakistan be liberated. The National Conference representative in Parliament supported that resolution.
Much is being made by Omar and his party of autonomy. The fact is that Kashmir enjoys more autonomy than any state in India but has the least autonomy below the state level. A regional political imbalance persists and is sought to be perpetuated by the embargo on delimitation of constituencies. For 49,725 voters, Kashmir has one MLA but Jammu has one MLA for 66,521 voters. This means that despite having 1,77,153 more voters, Jammu has nine MLAs less in the legislature than Kashmir. Whereas Panchayat Raj functions in every state, it is yet to be established in J&K. The Right to Information Act has not yet been made fully functional in the state. In the name of autonomy a reversion to the pre-1953 constitutional status is sought. This will entail removal of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the Election Commission and the Comptroller and Auditor General. There is also a demand for an elected governor from the state and doing away with IAS, IPS and other Central services. The changes effected through due process of law prescribed by the Constitution, and ratified by the state legislature, are sought to be scrapped in the name of autonomy. These changes were endorsed by the Indira-Sheikh accord. They also received the people’s support in the Sheikh’s overwhelming victory in the 1977 state elections, regarded by all as free and fair. It is strange that Sheikh Abdullah’s progenies, who attained political power for being his descendants, now want to undo what he did in the interests of the state and are chasing a mirage of autonomy. It is also pertinent that Central per capita aid is the highest in Kashmir, many times more than some other states in the country. Removal of the jurisdiction of the Comptroller and Auditor General would mean absence of financial accountability. Omar has sought regional autonomy for Jammu and Ladakh regions and has urged splitting them into sub-regions of Jammu, Rajouri, Poonch, Doda, Kargil and Leh, which would virtually be a division on communal lines. It is interesting that the Valley is not required to be split into the plains and mountain regions, obviously because of commonalty of religion.
The need in J&K is to restore order, remove governance deficit, commence political dialogue and meet the legitimate aspirations of all stakeholders in the state, within the framework of the Indian Constitution. It must not be lost sight of that the separatists constitute a minority in the state. Their influence is generally confined to the Valley, excluding the Gujjars and Bakherwals, living in the mountains. The recent stone-pelting agitation was confined to the Valley, without any Gujjar or Bakherwal participation.
- The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/dc-comment/kashmir-integral-truths-134
Abstract of the Vijaya Dashami Speech of Sarsanghachalak Ma. Mohanji Bhagwat.
Aashwin shukla 10, Yu.5112 ( 17 Oct.2010)
Verdict on Ram Janmabhoomi- an auspicious sign
Festival of Vijaya Dashami is celebrated in our country with great gaiety and enthusiasm from time immemorial as a day of victory of the “Dharma” i.e. virtue service and righteousness. This year the festival comes at a time when the entire nation is heartened by the court verdict on the Ram Janm Bhumi issue delivered on 30 September 2010. This verdict of the Lakhnau bench of the Allahabad High court will ultimately facilitate the creation of a monumental temple on the Ram janmabhoomi. Maryada Purushottam Ram is the manifest divine for the Hindus all over the world. At the same time He is also the manifestation of our national culture and it's honour that is at the core of our country's identity, ethos, integrity, urge for freedom and vigour. That is why in the first copy of our Constitution among the pictures attested as discription for the events that reflect our ideals, aspirations and traditions, the first individual picture that finds place after the pictures of Mohenjadaro and the life in a hermitage is that of Sri Ram. History of the Sikh Panth clearly records Shri Guru Nanak Dev ji’s visit to Sri Ram Janmabhoomi at Ayodhya in 1526 A.D. during his all Bharat tour. Now it has been acknowledged on the basis of historical, archaeological and physical evidence that there existed a sacred Hindu monument at the site of Sri Ram Janm Bhumi prior to 1528 AD.
A chance ordained by destiny
The legal proceeding of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi was streched for 60 long years, and it has led to acrimonious disharmony, severe conflict and pain in the entire society. Forgetting the past all of us have to come together to build a massive temple at his birth place in Ayodhya for Maryada Purushottam Sriram who represents our national heritage and honour. That would put an end to all the pain and uncalled for controversy. The Sangh views the verdict as an opportunity presented by the destiny to every section in our country including the Muslims to make a new beginning in the spirit of affectionate coexistence. Let us overcome our petty divisiveness, obduracy borne out of prejudices and suspicion; own up our unique, one and only, all-inclusive and tolerant culture that inspires in us unwavering and intense sense of patriotism and respect for our ancestors, and preserves, promotes and validates all the diversities; and come together to build the temple at the birth place of Sriram who is, in the words of Late Sri Lohia, the catalyst for the integration of the North and the South of Bharat. This is the will of the entire society. This will has manifested amply in the unity and restraint displayed by our society after the verdict.
Be aware of conspirators
But we also witness efforts being launched from day one to distort this opportunity for national integration into an instrument for achieving political self-interest by appeasement. Some people, who have mastered the art of creating conflicts on the basis of our diversity like religion, region and language for the sake of securing votes, are again resorting to petty conspiracies to destroy our social harmony in the guise of lofty yet misleading utterances and clamour in the name of secularism. They always create impediments in any efforts and initiatives for harmony. There are a few people in our intelligentsia and the media also who, overcome by their egoistic feeling towards their own illusive thought and by their prejudices against Hindu thought and activism in favor of Hindus , have shamefully abandoned all concern and fear for truth. Sole guiding factor for them is their self-interest or business interest. One can easily identify them by studying the difference in their language and behavior until 4 PM on 30 September and ever since the verdict was announced. Their attempts to create fear and mistrust between various sections and organizations of our society always take place in the guise of weird arguments in the name of humanity and secularism. We must always be wary of these forces. In fact these are the people who are responsible for not allowing hoary ideals like universal brotherhood, harmony and freedom from exploitation etc to blossom by resorting to the use of those very ideals for achieving their own self-interests and evil objectives.
Now it is evident that due to these very tendencies a dangerous conspiracy is afoot to bring into vogue words like Hindu Terror and Saffron Terror under the pretext that some Hindu individuals, were allegedly involved in incidents of terror here and there. There are attempts to drag Sangh also into it. This is a sinister conspiracy to mislead Hindus through a campaign of lies and to defame Hindu saints, noble citizens, temples and organizations. We have not bothered to find out as to who is behind all this and who is going to be the beneficiary of this vilification campaign. But what is certain is that in stead of benefitting anybody this campaign would certainly bring disrepute to our nation and push it into serious danger.
This sinister campaign — to defame the saffron colour that adorns our constitutionally-ordained national flag representing sacrifice, hard work and wisdom; the Hindu society, it's saints and Sadhwis who always stay away from such militant activities and fight the forces of terror; our country Bharat; the Swayamsevaks and the Sangh-inspired organisations that are always at the forefront helping the administration risking their own lives at the time of natural calamities as well as man-made disasters like terror attacks and wars, and who are running 1.57 Lakh service projects for the deprived sections without any self-interest or discrimination — is bound to fail. Before the judicial trial had even commenced the media trial has been unleashed against the Sangh by spreading canards. Those who are indulging in this malicious campaign should first glance at their own defaced self. This is not the time to push the country into depraving electoral conspiracies.
Game of international politics in Kashmir
The crisis in Kashmir has become very serious and complicated. Due to our negligence Baltisthan and Gilgit have become a part of Pakistan and now China is trying to complete it's encirclement of Bharat by positioning it's army in those regions. America is moving with a design to safely and honourably run away from Afghanistan and secure foothold in Kashmir with the help of Pakistan. We should move fast before this shadow of sinister international politics overtakes the Valley. We have to create atmosphere in Afghanistan favourable to our interests and strive to turn the situation in the Valley towards greater integration with the rest of Bharat. This is the mandated duty of any national government towards it's integral parts. Sovereign State power of Bharat should not be seen as buckling under the separatist sponsored stone pelters' designs. Removing Army bunkers or reducing their powers is not going to help in protecting the integrity and security of our country. The direction of our policies should be guided by the unanimous resolution of our Parliament in 1994. We must not forget that the accession of Kashmir into Bharat through the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh is final and non-negotiable.
Separatists are a minority in J. & K.
Kashmir Valley is not the whole and sole of J&K state. Even in the Valley it is only a tiny minority which is clamouring for autonomy and dreaming of Azadi by promoting secessionism. Engaging and patronizing only these secessionist groups and their leaders in various dialogues is not going to help in resolving the crisis. In fact it will only aggravate the problem. Besides the Valley we have to think seriously about the problems being faced by Jammu and Ladakh for decades and the discrimination that they are being subjected to. We have to undoubtedly talk to the youngsters and people of the Valley who have come under the sessionist sway. But at the same it is imperative on our part to appreciate the feelings, needs and aspirations of various other sections of the state like the nationalist-minded Muslims, Gujjars-Bakrawals, Shias, Sikhs, Hindus including Kashmiri Pandits and Buddhists.
There is an urgent need to pay attention to the long-standing demands of the refugees from the PoK. The Kashmiri Pandits must be able to return to their homes and hearths with honour and safety and assured livelihood. All these sections want complete integration of the state with rest of Bharat. That is why when we think of J&K we must take into account security, development and aspirations of all these sections. The dialogues taking place in the context of J&K will be representative and fruitful only when these sections are also included and listened to.
Eversince the Independence people of J&K have been craving for peace and a good government that doesn't discriminate. It is necessary to ensure that they soon get such a government and administration which is free from corruption and discrimination.
China – a grave challenge
China, which used to equate it's forced occupation of Tibet with Kashmir problem to justify it's illegitimate action, has now registered its presence in Gilgit and Baltisthan. It attempted to meddle in our internal affairs by declaring that citizens of J&K and Arunachal Pradesh needn't ask for visas to enter China. At least now there shouldn't be any confusion or illusion in the minds of any about the real intentions of China. It's military, political and economic designs to encircle, pressurize and weaken Bharat are too glaring to be missed. In contrast we need to do lot more in our military, political and economic strategy; alertness of our leadership; preparation of the public mind etc. Any further delay in this matter would be tantamount to inviting grave threats to the nation in the near future.
The Naxal trouble
China has sponsored and promoted Maoist insurgency in Nepal. Maoists of our country have close links with the Maoists of Nepal. The Govenment is stuck up in internal squabbles over the question of firmly dealing with the Maoists. We don't even see credible efforts being initiated to make the administration transparent and accountable and speeding up development activity in the Maoist-infested areas. At times even this problem is being used for achieving ulterior political benefits. It will prove costly for our national security and democracy.
Ignoring the patriots in North East
This issue is very significant in the context of our North East also. There also the separatists get all the attention and those loyal to our country are grossly ignored. It is this policy that has provided golden opportunity to the separatist terrorist outfits like the NSCN, who had lost all the public support and were almost dead, to once again raise their ugly heads of terror and separatism. Arunachal Pradesh, that withstood the Chinese' machinations and is standing like a protective wall on our border, is today a victim of gross neglect. Patriotic people of Manipur suffered immensely from the shortage of essential commodities when blockades were imposed for long durations by the separatist forces; tired of appealing for help and finally became dejected and anguished. Don't our leaders realise the costs of this attitude of pampering the separatist forces and neglecting our own patriotic people on our border security especially when these borders are in the shadow of the expansionist designs of China? Continued negligence towards designs and disturbances caused by foreign missionaries has further complicated the situation.
Appeasement is dangerous
On the one hand is this attitude of vacillation and lack of will power displayed by our ruling establishment and on the other hand is unmitigated influx of the Bangladeshi infiltrators from across the borders that have been left porous even after 60 years of independence. The courts as well as the intelligence agencies have repeatedly asked for detection, deletion and deportation of these infiltrators. However the experience everywhere is that our leaders at both the State and Central levels, who stoop to any low for the sake of votes, lack basic will power and courage to initiate even the first step of detecting. This infiltration is completely changing the demographic profile of the North East and the border districts of Bengal and Bihar. It has led to rise in fundamentalism there. Rowdy and antisocial elemnts have been emboldened by this and the local tribes and Hindus have become victimes of the highhandedness and atrocities of these elements. Latest example of the plight of the patriotic Hindus in this region is the murderous attack on the Hindus in Deganga in West Bengal. Neither the state government nor the central government is bothered about the sufferings of the Hindus. All that they are bothered about is their votes. The government and the policy makers have realized from several experiences That deterioration in internal law and order situation and security of Hindus in the border districts is fraught with serious implications for our border security. Yet there is no change in the situation.
One doubts whether the government is really bothered about this issue at all. The way provisions have been made in the census data collection this time for people to claim nationality without providing any proof, any illegal migrant could claim nationality here. All the citizens are going to get a Unique Identity Number soon. But where is the arrangement to verify whether those securing the Identity Number are actually the citizens of our country or not? We shouldn't allow any such mistakes or casual approach in these policy matters.
We make tall claims about creating a society free from caste by birth identity. Then why are we making policies as part of which while conducting the census of this one nation's one people caste data will also be collected thereby reminding people of their castes once again? Renowned scholars and social activists have appealed to the countrymen that in order to create a united and coherent society they must declare their caste as Hindu, Hindustani or Bharateeya. Why should the government, which is duty-bound to bring in emotional integration, act to the contrary and ask each citizen about his caste? The government can find another independent, temporary and limited plan to collect necessary data for the sake of it's various schemes.
Preaching and practice
What do we claim about the future of this nation and where are we actually leading it? The common man of this country, whose economic well-being we all talk about, is a simple farmer, a small-time shop owner, a push-cart vegetable vendor or a footpath trader. He is an unorganized worker in a town or a village; he is an artisan or a tribal. But the western economic model that we follow is big businessmen-centric, village-uprooting, employment-displacing, environment-destroying, high energy-consuming and expensive. It is not centered round common man, environment, energy and investment saving, employment generating etc. On one hand we talk about education to all; on the other hand we convert education into a business and make it unaffordable for the poor. We want our education system to impart values like humanity, social responsibility, duty-consciousness and patriotism effectively in our society. But at the same time we have thrown out all those things that help inculcate these values and instead promoting books and syllabi that would only promote a race for more money, selfishness, materialism and insensitivity. At the root of this gap between our words and deeds is the gross ignorance of and total disrespect for the real identity of our nationhood, unity and our global mission coupled with our selfishness and disharmony. An alert and awakened society that is seized of ensuring proper mindset in the leaders of the nation and preventing any distortions can only salvage this situation.
Hinduness – need of the hour
The RSS has been engaged in creating individuals capable of building such a society for the last 85 years. It is now universally accepted and becoming more and more clear that Hindutva is the core identity of this ancient nation, and an imperative basis for it's integrity and security, basis of the unity of the society and it's vigor, and the catalyst for a lasting peace in the world.
25 years ago on the occasion of Vijayadashami from the same platform the then Sarsanghachalak Sri Balasaheb Deoras had said that secularism, socialism and democracy are still alive in our country only because this is Hindu Rashtra. Today eminent thinkers like M. J. Akbar and Rashid Alvi are also saying the same thing. Hindutva alone can awaken us to the underlying oneness in the manifest diversity around, protect and respect it and organize all that diversity in one unified thread. Let the Hindu society which is the progeny of this land internalize this comprehensive, universal welfare-oriented, non-reactionary idea of Hindutva in thought, word and deed. Let us unite and fearlessly proclaim loud and clear the honor of sacred motherland Bharat, it's glorious history and traditions, and the eternal Hindu culture. The necessity of times makes it imperative that all of us unite. Let us get rid of selfishness and disharmony and make all out efforts for building an eminently glorious and victorious Bharat. Let us free the whole world from its problems and conduct it in the path of peace. This is the one and the only effective and decisive means to successfully overcome all the difficult challenges.
Objective of the Sangh work is to impart Hindu values and honor in every individual through daily shakha; inspire and equip him to have a clean and selfless heart and offer the entire life for the country, Dharma and culture; and build a strong and united society. Sangh has no other objective or ambition except to fulfill this mission. My humble expectation and whole hearted appeal to all of you is that you should understand this sacred mission, own it up and become a part of it.
Verdict on Ram Janmabhoomi- an auspicious sign
Festival of Vijaya Dashami is celebrated in our country with great gaiety and enthusiasm from time immemorial as a day of victory of the “Dharma” i.e. virtue service and righteousness. This year the festival comes at a time when the entire nation is heartened by the court verdict on the Ram Janm Bhumi issue delivered on 30 September 2010. This verdict of the Lakhnau bench of the Allahabad High court will ultimately facilitate the creation of a monumental temple on the Ram janmabhoomi. Maryada Purushottam Ram is the manifest divine for the Hindus all over the world. At the same time He is also the manifestation of our national culture and it's honour that is at the core of our country's identity, ethos, integrity, urge for freedom and vigour. That is why in the first copy of our Constitution among the pictures attested as discription for the events that reflect our ideals, aspirations and traditions, the first individual picture that finds place after the pictures of Mohenjadaro and the life in a hermitage is that of Sri Ram. History of the Sikh Panth clearly records Shri Guru Nanak Dev ji’s visit to Sri Ram Janmabhoomi at Ayodhya in 1526 A.D. during his all Bharat tour. Now it has been acknowledged on the basis of historical, archaeological and physical evidence that there existed a sacred Hindu monument at the site of Sri Ram Janm Bhumi prior to 1528 AD.
A chance ordained by destiny
The legal proceeding of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi was streched for 60 long years, and it has led to acrimonious disharmony, severe conflict and pain in the entire society. Forgetting the past all of us have to come together to build a massive temple at his birth place in Ayodhya for Maryada Purushottam Sriram who represents our national heritage and honour. That would put an end to all the pain and uncalled for controversy. The Sangh views the verdict as an opportunity presented by the destiny to every section in our country including the Muslims to make a new beginning in the spirit of affectionate coexistence. Let us overcome our petty divisiveness, obduracy borne out of prejudices and suspicion; own up our unique, one and only, all-inclusive and tolerant culture that inspires in us unwavering and intense sense of patriotism and respect for our ancestors, and preserves, promotes and validates all the diversities; and come together to build the temple at the birth place of Sriram who is, in the words of Late Sri Lohia, the catalyst for the integration of the North and the South of Bharat. This is the will of the entire society. This will has manifested amply in the unity and restraint displayed by our society after the verdict.
Be aware of conspirators
But we also witness efforts being launched from day one to distort this opportunity for national integration into an instrument for achieving political self-interest by appeasement. Some people, who have mastered the art of creating conflicts on the basis of our diversity like religion, region and language for the sake of securing votes, are again resorting to petty conspiracies to destroy our social harmony in the guise of lofty yet misleading utterances and clamour in the name of secularism. They always create impediments in any efforts and initiatives for harmony. There are a few people in our intelligentsia and the media also who, overcome by their egoistic feeling towards their own illusive thought and by their prejudices against Hindu thought and activism in favor of Hindus , have shamefully abandoned all concern and fear for truth. Sole guiding factor for them is their self-interest or business interest. One can easily identify them by studying the difference in their language and behavior until 4 PM on 30 September and ever since the verdict was announced. Their attempts to create fear and mistrust between various sections and organizations of our society always take place in the guise of weird arguments in the name of humanity and secularism. We must always be wary of these forces. In fact these are the people who are responsible for not allowing hoary ideals like universal brotherhood, harmony and freedom from exploitation etc to blossom by resorting to the use of those very ideals for achieving their own self-interests and evil objectives.
Now it is evident that due to these very tendencies a dangerous conspiracy is afoot to bring into vogue words like Hindu Terror and Saffron Terror under the pretext that some Hindu individuals, were allegedly involved in incidents of terror here and there. There are attempts to drag Sangh also into it. This is a sinister conspiracy to mislead Hindus through a campaign of lies and to defame Hindu saints, noble citizens, temples and organizations. We have not bothered to find out as to who is behind all this and who is going to be the beneficiary of this vilification campaign. But what is certain is that in stead of benefitting anybody this campaign would certainly bring disrepute to our nation and push it into serious danger.
This sinister campaign — to defame the saffron colour that adorns our constitutionally-ordained national flag representing sacrifice, hard work and wisdom; the Hindu society, it's saints and Sadhwis who always stay away from such militant activities and fight the forces of terror; our country Bharat; the Swayamsevaks and the Sangh-inspired organisations that are always at the forefront helping the administration risking their own lives at the time of natural calamities as well as man-made disasters like terror attacks and wars, and who are running 1.57 Lakh service projects for the deprived sections without any self-interest or discrimination — is bound to fail. Before the judicial trial had even commenced the media trial has been unleashed against the Sangh by spreading canards. Those who are indulging in this malicious campaign should first glance at their own defaced self. This is not the time to push the country into depraving electoral conspiracies.
Game of international politics in Kashmir
The crisis in Kashmir has become very serious and complicated. Due to our negligence Baltisthan and Gilgit have become a part of Pakistan and now China is trying to complete it's encirclement of Bharat by positioning it's army in those regions. America is moving with a design to safely and honourably run away from Afghanistan and secure foothold in Kashmir with the help of Pakistan. We should move fast before this shadow of sinister international politics overtakes the Valley. We have to create atmosphere in Afghanistan favourable to our interests and strive to turn the situation in the Valley towards greater integration with the rest of Bharat. This is the mandated duty of any national government towards it's integral parts. Sovereign State power of Bharat should not be seen as buckling under the separatist sponsored stone pelters' designs. Removing Army bunkers or reducing their powers is not going to help in protecting the integrity and security of our country. The direction of our policies should be guided by the unanimous resolution of our Parliament in 1994. We must not forget that the accession of Kashmir into Bharat through the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh is final and non-negotiable.
Separatists are a minority in J. & K.
Kashmir Valley is not the whole and sole of J&K state. Even in the Valley it is only a tiny minority which is clamouring for autonomy and dreaming of Azadi by promoting secessionism. Engaging and patronizing only these secessionist groups and their leaders in various dialogues is not going to help in resolving the crisis. In fact it will only aggravate the problem. Besides the Valley we have to think seriously about the problems being faced by Jammu and Ladakh for decades and the discrimination that they are being subjected to. We have to undoubtedly talk to the youngsters and people of the Valley who have come under the sessionist sway. But at the same it is imperative on our part to appreciate the feelings, needs and aspirations of various other sections of the state like the nationalist-minded Muslims, Gujjars-Bakrawals, Shias, Sikhs, Hindus including Kashmiri Pandits and Buddhists.
There is an urgent need to pay attention to the long-standing demands of the refugees from the PoK. The Kashmiri Pandits must be able to return to their homes and hearths with honour and safety and assured livelihood. All these sections want complete integration of the state with rest of Bharat. That is why when we think of J&K we must take into account security, development and aspirations of all these sections. The dialogues taking place in the context of J&K will be representative and fruitful only when these sections are also included and listened to.
Eversince the Independence people of J&K have been craving for peace and a good government that doesn't discriminate. It is necessary to ensure that they soon get such a government and administration which is free from corruption and discrimination.
China – a grave challenge
China, which used to equate it's forced occupation of Tibet with Kashmir problem to justify it's illegitimate action, has now registered its presence in Gilgit and Baltisthan. It attempted to meddle in our internal affairs by declaring that citizens of J&K and Arunachal Pradesh needn't ask for visas to enter China. At least now there shouldn't be any confusion or illusion in the minds of any about the real intentions of China. It's military, political and economic designs to encircle, pressurize and weaken Bharat are too glaring to be missed. In contrast we need to do lot more in our military, political and economic strategy; alertness of our leadership; preparation of the public mind etc. Any further delay in this matter would be tantamount to inviting grave threats to the nation in the near future.
The Naxal trouble
China has sponsored and promoted Maoist insurgency in Nepal. Maoists of our country have close links with the Maoists of Nepal. The Govenment is stuck up in internal squabbles over the question of firmly dealing with the Maoists. We don't even see credible efforts being initiated to make the administration transparent and accountable and speeding up development activity in the Maoist-infested areas. At times even this problem is being used for achieving ulterior political benefits. It will prove costly for our national security and democracy.
Ignoring the patriots in North East
This issue is very significant in the context of our North East also. There also the separatists get all the attention and those loyal to our country are grossly ignored. It is this policy that has provided golden opportunity to the separatist terrorist outfits like the NSCN, who had lost all the public support and were almost dead, to once again raise their ugly heads of terror and separatism. Arunachal Pradesh, that withstood the Chinese' machinations and is standing like a protective wall on our border, is today a victim of gross neglect. Patriotic people of Manipur suffered immensely from the shortage of essential commodities when blockades were imposed for long durations by the separatist forces; tired of appealing for help and finally became dejected and anguished. Don't our leaders realise the costs of this attitude of pampering the separatist forces and neglecting our own patriotic people on our border security especially when these borders are in the shadow of the expansionist designs of China? Continued negligence towards designs and disturbances caused by foreign missionaries has further complicated the situation.
Appeasement is dangerous
On the one hand is this attitude of vacillation and lack of will power displayed by our ruling establishment and on the other hand is unmitigated influx of the Bangladeshi infiltrators from across the borders that have been left porous even after 60 years of independence. The courts as well as the intelligence agencies have repeatedly asked for detection, deletion and deportation of these infiltrators. However the experience everywhere is that our leaders at both the State and Central levels, who stoop to any low for the sake of votes, lack basic will power and courage to initiate even the first step of detecting. This infiltration is completely changing the demographic profile of the North East and the border districts of Bengal and Bihar. It has led to rise in fundamentalism there. Rowdy and antisocial elemnts have been emboldened by this and the local tribes and Hindus have become victimes of the highhandedness and atrocities of these elements. Latest example of the plight of the patriotic Hindus in this region is the murderous attack on the Hindus in Deganga in West Bengal. Neither the state government nor the central government is bothered about the sufferings of the Hindus. All that they are bothered about is their votes. The government and the policy makers have realized from several experiences That deterioration in internal law and order situation and security of Hindus in the border districts is fraught with serious implications for our border security. Yet there is no change in the situation.
One doubts whether the government is really bothered about this issue at all. The way provisions have been made in the census data collection this time for people to claim nationality without providing any proof, any illegal migrant could claim nationality here. All the citizens are going to get a Unique Identity Number soon. But where is the arrangement to verify whether those securing the Identity Number are actually the citizens of our country or not? We shouldn't allow any such mistakes or casual approach in these policy matters.
We make tall claims about creating a society free from caste by birth identity. Then why are we making policies as part of which while conducting the census of this one nation's one people caste data will also be collected thereby reminding people of their castes once again? Renowned scholars and social activists have appealed to the countrymen that in order to create a united and coherent society they must declare their caste as Hindu, Hindustani or Bharateeya. Why should the government, which is duty-bound to bring in emotional integration, act to the contrary and ask each citizen about his caste? The government can find another independent, temporary and limited plan to collect necessary data for the sake of it's various schemes.
Preaching and practice
What do we claim about the future of this nation and where are we actually leading it? The common man of this country, whose economic well-being we all talk about, is a simple farmer, a small-time shop owner, a push-cart vegetable vendor or a footpath trader. He is an unorganized worker in a town or a village; he is an artisan or a tribal. But the western economic model that we follow is big businessmen-centric, village-uprooting, employment-displacing, environment-destroying, high energy-consuming and expensive. It is not centered round common man, environment, energy and investment saving, employment generating etc. On one hand we talk about education to all; on the other hand we convert education into a business and make it unaffordable for the poor. We want our education system to impart values like humanity, social responsibility, duty-consciousness and patriotism effectively in our society. But at the same time we have thrown out all those things that help inculcate these values and instead promoting books and syllabi that would only promote a race for more money, selfishness, materialism and insensitivity. At the root of this gap between our words and deeds is the gross ignorance of and total disrespect for the real identity of our nationhood, unity and our global mission coupled with our selfishness and disharmony. An alert and awakened society that is seized of ensuring proper mindset in the leaders of the nation and preventing any distortions can only salvage this situation.
Hinduness – need of the hour
The RSS has been engaged in creating individuals capable of building such a society for the last 85 years. It is now universally accepted and becoming more and more clear that Hindutva is the core identity of this ancient nation, and an imperative basis for it's integrity and security, basis of the unity of the society and it's vigor, and the catalyst for a lasting peace in the world.
25 years ago on the occasion of Vijayadashami from the same platform the then Sarsanghachalak Sri Balasaheb Deoras had said that secularism, socialism and democracy are still alive in our country only because this is Hindu Rashtra. Today eminent thinkers like M. J. Akbar and Rashid Alvi are also saying the same thing. Hindutva alone can awaken us to the underlying oneness in the manifest diversity around, protect and respect it and organize all that diversity in one unified thread. Let the Hindu society which is the progeny of this land internalize this comprehensive, universal welfare-oriented, non-reactionary idea of Hindutva in thought, word and deed. Let us unite and fearlessly proclaim loud and clear the honor of sacred motherland Bharat, it's glorious history and traditions, and the eternal Hindu culture. The necessity of times makes it imperative that all of us unite. Let us get rid of selfishness and disharmony and make all out efforts for building an eminently glorious and victorious Bharat. Let us free the whole world from its problems and conduct it in the path of peace. This is the one and the only effective and decisive means to successfully overcome all the difficult challenges.
Objective of the Sangh work is to impart Hindu values and honor in every individual through daily shakha; inspire and equip him to have a clean and selfless heart and offer the entire life for the country, Dharma and culture; and build a strong and united society. Sangh has no other objective or ambition except to fulfill this mission. My humble expectation and whole hearted appeal to all of you is that you should understand this sacred mission, own it up and become a part of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)