The AIMPLB want to keep the flame of communal tensions alive for their own narrow purposes. They remain in perpetual denial about the destruction of temples during Islamic rule. – R. Jagannathan
The decisions of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind to file review petitions against the Supreme Court verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi case tells us two things: one, many Muslim organisations, egged on by Leftist trouble-makers, want to keep the flame of communal tensions alive for their own narrow purposes; and two, they will remain in perpetual denial about the destruction of temples during Islamic rule.
The first point is obvious, since the AIMPLB explicitly promised to abide by any court verdict repeatedly before 9 November. By now changing its tune when the verdict went the other way, it is clearly guilty of making false promises. Its decision to seek a review of the unanimous verdict of a five-judge bench, with one sitting chief justice and two future chief justices, is driven by mala fide intentions.
But the larger worry is that Muslims will be in implicit denial of the depredations of former Islamic rulers. This does not augur well for the future of Hindu-Muslim relations.
Soon after the verdict, the AIMPLB made the unambiguous claim that “the land of the mosque belongs to Allah and under the Sharia it cannot be given to anybody”. As this writer pointed out in an earlier article, India is not governed by the Sharia but by the Indian Constitution. The more worrisome aspect of this statement is that Muslims will not even acknowledge the reality that a mosque was built over the remains of a temple – and this is the case with hundreds of mosques in India.
One can always challenge a court judgement on technical grounds, but what the Supreme Court verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi case did was to use the law of adverse possession creatively to deliver civilisational justice to Hindus, who were wronged by the actions of bigoted and iconoclastic rulers in the past. These wrongs continue to be denied in the present by their religious successors – present-day Islamic organisations.
Just as Hindus can never remain in denial about caste injustices, Muslims can’t remain in denial of their own past, when temples were destroyed by bigoted rulers.
The Jamiat and the AIMPLB have a legal right to challenge any Supreme Court verdict, but they have no right to deny Hindus civilisational justice by refusing to acknowledge past injustices. The Ram Janmabhoomi verdict was minor recompense for widespread destruction of Hindu lives and temple properties in the past. It shows that they are unwilling to truly move towards a healthier relationship with Hindus of present-day India.
The Supreme Court should not only reject the review petitions peremptorily, but also deliver a stinging rebuke to the parties that want to deny the wrongs of the past. – Swarajya, 3 Decemeber, 2019
› R. Jagannathan is the editorial director of Swarajya.
Subramanian Swamy urges for amendments in the Places of Worship Act of 1991. – Team PGurus
Senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to bring amendments in the Places of Worship Act 1991, citing that certain provisions in the Act is against the spirit of Fundamental Right of Freedom of Worship, enshrined in the Constitution of India. In his letter, Swamy pointed out that Section 4 of the Places of Worship Act must be amended as it is ultra vires of the Right to Worship.
The Places of Worship Act passed by Narasimha Rao’s Government in September 1991 was brought in context to control the Sangh Parivar’s widespread movement for the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. Section 4 of the Act says that except in the Ayodhya case, the status quo of temples and other worshiping areas will be maintained as on August 15, 1947, the day India attained Independence. As per this Act, no courts or tribunals can entertain cases on Temples and worshiping areas character and rights over it. This Act was enacted to prevent Sangh Parivar which has already sought the liberation of Kashi Vishwanath Temple and Mathura Sri Krishna Temple partially destroyed by Aurangzeb and masjids were constructed on them.
As the Ayodhya case was already in the Courts, the Government exempted it from controversial Places of Worship Act of 1991. The recent verdict of the Ayodhya case also gives details about this Act.
“I write this letter to seek your direction to the Ministry of Law to effect an amendment to The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 and in particular Section 4 which is offensive and ultra vires of my fundamental rights under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution. This Act was enacted by the Congress Government headed by Mr. Narasimha Rao. Fundamental Rights cannot be amended or modified by the Parliament or by any law passed by Parliament. It cannot have the overriding effect of extinguishing my fundamental right of freedom of worship under Article 25 and 26 as also faith enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution. This makes it a part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
Hence the Ministry of Law should bring an amendment to this Act starting that it is not applicable to those religious institutions where the question of fundamental right and faith is claimed. I shall seek an appointment with the Law Minister Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad to explain in detail this matter. I seek your intervention and appropriate direction to the Ministry of Law and Justice,” said Subramanian Swamy in his letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. – PGurus, 1 December 2019
See Aurangzeb’s temple-breaking legacy according to Mughal records – FACT
Filed under: india | Tagged: AIMPLB, ayodhya verdict, jamiat ulama-i-hind, subramanian swamy, supreme court of india |