GoI consider Indians as potential criminals

Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum
(A NGO promoted by Hindu Voice and Registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950)
Regn. No. E-25872(M) dtd. 15th July 2009
210 Abhinav, 2nd Floor, Teen Dongri, Yeshwant Nagar, Goregaon West, Mumbai 400062.
Tel: 28764460, 09324728153
* Email: [email protected] * http://hjifmumbai.blogspot.com

 
PRESS STATEMENT
 
1. Does the GoI consider Indians as potential criminals?
 
Just before the Allahabad High Court was to give its verdict on 30th Sept. 2010 on the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Structure issue, the Govt. of India came out with large advertisements in all leading newspapers asking people to maintain peace. The Prime Minister and the Home Minister came on TV, and advised people to maintain calm. The home ministry identified several sensitive areas where trouble could erupt. A huge troop mobilisation was made. Even Air Force helicopters were pressed into service and Rapid Action Forces were kept ready to be moved to troubled spots. There was a virtual fear psychosis created across the country. Many MNCs and offices closed their shops for the day, and declared holiday. The loss to the economy due to this self-imposed curfew is enormous. The roads, bus stops, railway stations and the markets wore a deserted look.
 
This is when both the litigants guaranteed calm, and if they have grievances they will appeal to the Supreme Court. Promises were made prominently by the RSS chief Shri Mohanji Bhagvat, and others on the Hindu side. So too the Sunni Waqf Board and Muslim leaders made assurance that they will maintain peace, and will resort to legal recourse.
 
The judgement has come. As promised, both Hindus and Muslims have maintained peace. There is no untoward incidents all over this vast nation.
 
Under these circumstances, Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Form feels that the Government of India owes an explanation to the nation as to what made them to create this fear psychosis among the people. What was the need to take out such large advertisements appealing for peace? Whom were they afraid of creating trouble, when both the parties had assured peace? What was the necessity to mobilise even our Air Force? Does the Government of India consider its citizens as potential criminals and trouble makers? Was it done on the basis of any Intelligence Reports? All these questions need answers from the Govt.
 
The inference of the common man is that the Government of India has ended up with egg on its face. The people have shown enough maturity. But the Government has not.
 
2. SAHMAT trying to disturb communal harmony
 
While the parties to the dispute have maintained peace, a fringe organisation named SAHMAT has come out with a Statement on Ayodhya Verdict dated 1st October 2010 with a view to creating communal tension. The statement is signed by 61 ‘intellectuals’ and ’eminent historians’, many of whom are holding cozy govt. and semi-government positions and are enjoying government perks. They seem to be unhappy at the communal peace prevailing after the judgement.
 
The statement reads that “we cannot but see the judgement as yet another blow to the secular fabric of our country”.  Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum demands from Sahmat, in what way the judgement tears the secular fabric of the country? Secularism will be alive and kicking as long as Hindus are strong and in the majority. That is why when the Constitution was framed, none of the Hindu leaders insisted on the word ‘secularism’ in its Preamble. Only Smt. Indira Gandhi included it during emergency to fool the people, as though secularism was not existing from 1947 till 1975. That it has today come to mean as ‘minority appeasement’ is a different matter.
 
By stating that “The most objectionable part of the judgement is the legitimation it provides to violence and muscle-power” and “it accepts the destruction of the mosque in 1992”,  SAHMAT is trying to mislead the general public. The case in question was a civil suit. The question of demolition of Babri structure on 6th Dec. 1992 is an alleged criminal act and was out of the purview of this court.
 
SAHMAT’s statement questions the findings of the Archeological Survey of India and calls it controversial. In fact, most of the signatories to the statement have all along been fooling the public by twisting the history of India and Hindus. The Allahabad High Court judgement has proved that they are all liars.  The judgement has exposed them and therefore they are running helter-skelter. The ASI excavated the site in the presence of two judicial officers and many witnesses, many of whom were Muslims. Look at what Justice Sudhir Agarwal has stated in his judgement, “In our view, the conclusion drawn by the ASI in the project accomplished within an extra-ordinary brief period and with such an excellence precision and perfection deserve commendation and appreciation instead of condemnation.” But SAHMAT thinks otherwise!
 
When even Muslim do not dispute that Lord Ram existed or that he was born in Ayodhya, the signatories to the statement have always been raising the canard of ‘absence of evidence’. Although eminent persons like Shri Arun Shourie, Dr. Koenraad Elst, Dr.David Frawley, Late Shri Sita Ram Goel , Late Shri Ram Swarup, Dr. N.S. Rajaram etc., have exposed these “Eminences”  in their respective works, they (the ‘Eminences’) have always been able to ‘get away’ with their ‘fabrications’ of our history and our civilizational ethos. It has taken nearly 60 years for Hindus to legally prove their (Hindus’) claims and expose these lies. And they are now furious that the Allahabad High Court has refused to put its stamp of approval on all their fabrications and lies.
 
By casting aspersions on the AHC judgement, SAHMAT and the 61 ‘intellectuals’ and ’eminent historians’ who have signed the Statement have done an act which amounts to contempt of court. Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum appeals to the Supreme Court that it take suo moto action against all those signatories and the communal organisation, SAHMAT. These people must be proscribed and given exemplary punishment, for attempting to rekindle communal frenzy.
 
3. The supreme Court has already decided ‘not to decide’
 
Both the litigants have declared that they will go to the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court has already decided ‘not to decide’ on this case. On 7th January 1993, the President of India referred the issue to the Supreme Court for a decision. The Presidential reference read: “Whether a Hindu Temple or any religious structure existed prior to the construction of the Ramjanmabhoomi–Babri Masjid (including the premises of the inner and outer courtyards of such structure) in the areas on which the structure stood?”

Chief Justice of India M.N. Venkatachaliah, Justice J.S. Verma and Justice G.N. Ray together signed a judgement dated 24th October 1994, which said, in para 100(11): “We very respectfully decline to answer it and return the same”. Justice A.M. Ahmadi and Justice S.P. Bharucha gave their judgement on the same day. Para 165 of their judgement read: “The Presidential Reference is returned respectfully, unanswered”. Haven’t they already decided ‘not to decide’?

Therefore, Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum appeals to all concerned that the Allahabad High Court’s verdict be treated as the end of the judicial process in this issue.

4. The government’s word:

Those who opposed the presidential reference dated 7th January 1993 said the question was academic and vague and did not serve any constitutional purpose. The Supreme Court asked the solicitor-general to clarify. The solicitor-general responded with a written statement on behalf of the central government on September 14, 1994. He said the government would treat the finding of the court on the question of fact raised in the presidential reference as a verdict which is final and binding. Government’s action in this regard will be even-handed in respect of both the communities. If the question referred is answered in the affirmative, namely, that a Hindu temple/structure did exist prior to the construction of the demolished structure, government action will be in support of the wishes of the Hindu community.

Now that the AHC has unanimoulsy upheld the FACT that a Hindu Temple pre-dated the Babri structure and since the Government of India had given a written undertaking to the Supreme Court on 14th Sept. 1994, the Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum demands that the UPA Govt. now honour its word.

5. Shia-Sunni dispute

But what is surprising is that while the Shia Muslims are magnanimous in offering the entire site for constructing a Ram Temple, it is the Sunni Muslims who are on the war path. Babar was a Shia Muslim and the Babri structure was a Shia structure. Shias and Sunnis are having separate Mosques and Graveyards. One does not go to the other. Then how can Sunni Muslims fight for this Shia structure? In fact, Sunni Muslims are bombing Shia mosques and killing Shia Muslims in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. But in India, they ostensibly come to the rescue of Shia Muslims when Shias themselves don’t want them.

6. Make law for building the Temple.

Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum is all for a negotiated settlement of the dispute.  Since Shia Muslims are already ready, the Sunni Muslims should give up their claim on the 1/3 plot and pave the way for building a magnificent Ram Temple at Ayodhya. In the absence of any negotiated settlement, Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum demands that the parliament pass a law giving the entire disputed land to Hindus for building the temple for Sri Ram.

P. Deivamuthu
Founder-President, Hindu Journalists & Intellectuals Forum (Regd.)
Editor, Hindu Voice (Monthly)
Editor, National Spirit (Weekly).

Mumbai, Dated: 13th October 2010

Responses