- Trust our politicians to never let go of an opportunity to fish in the troubled waters whose sole aim is to further polarize the society on the back of religion, caste, class, and creed. Rather than promote harmony, equity, peace, tranquility, and most importantly, focus on the overall development of the area each of the politicians represents, some of the most unscrupulous elements blatantly indulging in parochial considerations mirrors the sorry state of affairs in the country. We all know how the national ruling party came to power riding on the Lord Ram wave in the 1980s and is now an established entity consolidating its presence pan-India.
PC: macrovector
- Not satisfied with the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi title verdict, some Uttar Pradesh politicians are whipping up communal frenzy yet again. Of course, with an eye on the all-important ensuing elections to the assembly in UP, few of the BJP politicians are manufacturing yet another potential masjid-mandir dispute targeting the Shahi Eidgah mosque in Mathura. No less than the state BJP leaders like Deputy CM and Balia MP have suggested readiness for another round of mandir politics. As if on cue, Hindu Mahasabha, in a typical attempt, has even more dangerously announced it will hold an arti in mosque premises.
- Going a step further, the MP also sought repeal of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991, which expressly forbids turning over, in any manner, a place of worship from one faith to another. A sole exception was made so that the Babri-Ramjanmabhoomi title suit could proceed ahead. Moreover, the MP likened such repeal to the recently repealed farm reform laws. Of course, such an argument is as disingenuous as Mathura’s statements are dangerous. Note that protection for places of worship draws legitimacy from constitutional norms that enjoin the state to not discriminate on the ground of faith.
PC: Racool_studio
- Thus, likening two extremely opposing ends simply fails to provide plausible reasons. The BJP leaders are advised to read the Supreme Court’s Ayodhya verdict. The SC had clearly affirmed the 1991 law’s primacy whilst observing “this court cannot entertain claims that stem from the actions of the Mughal rulers against Hindu places of worship in a court of law today. For any person who seeks solace or recourse against the actions of any number of ancient rulers, the law is not the answer.” Most shockingly, despite apex court judgment and the 1991 law, a Mathura district court admitted a civil suit on the mosque-mandir issue defies logic.
- People in the know would be surprised why the UP BJP is harping onto an issue that is bordering on harmful societal divergence instead of cohesiveness. It is incumbent on the part of the UP CM and the BJP’s national leadership to rein in state unit leaders to focus on building coherence amongst citizens rather than division. The party brass should ponder why UP polls need a mandir agitation after tall claims of governance, welfare, and skillfully implemented caste strategies. And what does it say about BJP’s five-year governance in the state? No ready answer will be forthcoming, I guess.
