There is no question of backing
out from the issues of Ram Janmabhoomi, a common civil code, and Article
370 which the BJP wants abolished. The BJP is strong on its ideology
and the NDA partners have been apprised that its agenda for governance
is for the Centre, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, a BJP spokesman, said.
According to him, Advani had told the four BJP State chiefs that the
party would bring into play strategies based on the Hindutva ideology
in their States too. Advani asked them to begin a jan sampark (mass
contact) programme in this regard, he said.
BJP leaders in Uttar Pradesh too have
given ample indications that the party was back playing the Ayodhya
card in the State. State Urban Development Minister Lalji Tandon and
party chiefs Vinay Katiyar, who is the MP from the area, visited Ayodhya
in the first week of January and announced as much. They declared that
the temple construction was very much on the partys agenda. Tandon
announced a Rs.28-crore development package for Ayodhya and kicked off
54 development schemes, inciting those relating to infrastructure and
civic amenities. Some of these schemes had been announced two years
ago, but had failed to make any progress. All this is being done
to restore the glory and grandeur of this town, so that it stands in
readiness to welcome Lord Ram, Tandon said. He also asserted that
the partys coalition partner in the State, the Bahujan Samaj Party
(BSP), would not be allowed to come in the way of the plans. Just
as we have not expressed any objection to the BSP undertaking development
schemes in the name of its own icons, we expect it to allow us to pursue
our agenda, he said.
What, however, remains to be seen is the NDA allies reaction to
the developments. On similar occasions in the past the allies have taken
refuge in the argument that as long as the government was not deviating
from the NDA agenda it was all right with them. This time, however,
some noises have been heard. The Telugu Desam Party (TDP), the crucial
external supporter of the NDA government, has warned the BJP against
deviating from the NDA agenda and advised it to stick to governance
and not dabble in controversial issues. Senior TDP leader K. Yerran
Naidu said the governments move was improper because it was not
in consonance with the agreed agenda.
The Samata Party, which initially showed
signs of being opposed to the government approaching the Supreme Court,
changed lack. Its leader George Fernandes said there was nothing wrong
in the government approaching the court for directions. He said if need
be he would try and convince the other alliance partners about the matter.
The Opposition parties have, as was to
be expected, denounced the move. The Congress(I) said it was typical
of the BJP to bring the issue to the boil every time an election was
round the corner. Can anybody explain why this appeal was not
filed some months earlier? There was not a single reason for vacating
the Supreme Court order of March 2002, said Congress spokesman
Abhishek Singhvi, himself a Supreme Court lawyer.
Both the Communist Party of India and
the Communist Party of India (Marxist) said the status quo should prevail
in Ayodhya till the final order of the court in the main suit came and
that no construction or any other activity should be allowed on the
acquired land. Any move to the contrary would have a very evil
impact on the communal situation in the country, they stated.
The CPI said it was an attempt to distort the judicial process
and make a mockery of the law.
The BJP, however, remains smug in the
belief that as in the past, this time too the allies, reluctant to walk
out of the government, will find their own excuses to continue their
support. Besides, only recently they witnessed the results of an aggressive
Hindutva campaign in Gujarat and may hope to reap similar mileage in
other States. Why should NDA unity be at risk? The government
has merely sought the vacation of the Supreme Court order in Ayodhya.
Everything will depend on what the honourable court says, BJP
spokesman Naqvi said.
Although it is clear to anyone that this
is just another act of political jugglery by Vajpayee to walk the right
rope of governance and keep the Sangh Parivar happy at the same time,
there is no denying the fact that the issue has enough heat to bring
the country to the boil. The compulsion to create an emotive issue ahead
of a crucial round of elections guides Vajpayee right now.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board
has opposed the governments stand. The legal cell of the Board,
which met on February 9, decided to file either a rejoinder or an affidavit
when the case came up for hearing. In our opinion the situation
under which the Supreme Court had passed the March 13 order remains
unchanged, said the convener and spokesman of the AIMPLB committee
on the Babri Masjid, Dr. S.Q.R. Ilyas. Dr. Ilyas pointed to the fact
that the VHP had announced its Dharma Sansad where a programme for temple
construction was to be declared. The VHP has been making statements
that go contrary to the spirit of the Supreme Court order, he added.
Besides, the March 13 order had been passed in view of the Supreme
Courts earlier 1994 order through which the court had appointed
the Centre as the receiver of the acquired land till the final adjudication
of the case. The acquired land, the court had said, could only be distributed
to its owners or lessees and only after the final adjustment of the
disputed land. Hence the Centre cannot give away any part of the acquired
land to anyone till the controversy about the disputed land is settled,
Dr. Ilyas said.