On Friday, the Allahabad High Court will pronounce its verdict in the 60-year-old title suit in the Ramjanmabhoomi- Babri Masjid dispute.
For eighteen years, the debate has raged on about which politicians were responsible for the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, which set off riots that saw more than 2000 people killed.
On 23 November 2009, the media began reporting on the contents of the Liberhan Commission Report, which the opposition claimed had been deliberately leaked by the Home Ministry.
68 people have been held culpable in the report, which said the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was chiefly responsible for the demolition.
Here's a look at the big names who were indicted in the case.
Kalyan Singh, who was Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh at the time of the demolition, came in for severe criticism from the Commission.
The report called his government an 'essential component needed by the Sangh Parivar', and said the minister and his Cabinet allowed the RSS a free hand in the state.
It went on to accuse him of 'dismantling and diluting the security apparatus' of the state, and installing bureaucrats who could be counted on to sit back during the act.
Uma Bharti
Uma Bharati, who was then a BJP member, played a key role in the Ram Janmabhoomi Movement.
Her slogan was 'Ramlala Hum Aayenge, Mandir Wahin Banayenge' ('Ram, we will come, we will build a temple right there').
L K Advani
Although L K Advani has repeatedly spoken of his stance against the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the Liberhan Commission Report called him a 'pseudo moderate' and held him indirectly responsible for the incident.
While he has maintained that the day the historic mosque was demolished was the 'saddest of [his] life', even putting that down in his autobiography, witnesses have testified otherwise.
Anju Gupta, who is currently an official with the Research & Analysis Wing, told the court that Advani instigated crowds and celebrated the demolition of Babri Masjid.
Murali Manohar Joshi
Along with L K Advani, he has been blamed for not stopping the destruction of the mosque, by the Liberhan Commission, which held him 'intellectually and ideologically responsible
Atal Bihar Vajpayee
While he was not present in Ayodhya at the time the mosque was demolished, the report held that he knew of the plan in advance.
A speech he made a few hours before the demolition has often been quoted and variously interpreted since the incident.
Here's a few questions that need answers on the Ayodhya verdict.
- Ayodhya : politically dead or alive?
- Ayodhya verdict : time for closure?
- Will all political parties agree to the court verdict?
- Why such anxiety among political parties regarding the verdict?
- Ayodhya verdit : have we moved on?
its time for decision .....
ReplyDeletebut as many political parties are involved the judgement will be delayed.......
virajshah2@hotmail.com
I think place should be declared as govmnt property n instead of "Ram mandir" or "Masjid" INDIAN FLAG should be put up there..
ReplyDeleteYes, we have moved on.
ReplyDeleteApart from politicians, who cares on the verdict.
They say theres only 1 God, yet they fight for His separate residence!
i seriously think it is time for closure. in fact it is HIGH time. we have other issue more important than this one. i think we are wasting time and the verdict whatever it may be will lead to another dispute. it's better if the law and order concentrate on other pending more important issues such as the terrorist held up for serious damage to national security and cruelty ,namely, kasab. thank u :)
ReplyDeleteLiberhan Commission has taken 17 years to submit the report. The verdict is delayed and the justice,to the victims and the common man of Ayodhya is denied. It certainly time for closure. But it remains to be seen whether the verdict can come clean, without giving into any political pressures.
ReplyDeleteFor long, religious diversity has been misused for vote-bank politics. The political parties anxiety is expected.
Don't know if we have moved on, but the minutest will to "move on" needs to encouraged and protected from being crushed.
Like Jug Suraiya said, a non denominational shrine to all the victims of religious violence across the world should be built at the side. Ram and Muhammad, both would approve of it :)
I think, WE, the COMMON MAN have moved on. Its high time that even the politicians should stop Acting Greedy for their own sake, rather, they need to think more about development of our Society or for that matter, our own "Country"
ReplyDeleteVery well said priyanka mehta!:)
ReplyDeleteFirst of all great topic of discussion!!!
ReplyDeleteI think people have moved on but still there are certain sentiments left over which were precipitated after the demolition occurred. The political extremists could exploit that, so it is a very critical issue at the same time extremely sensitive one too. The politicians know very well how to add insult to the injury.It is indeed the time for the closure,we can't keep it hanging forever, I feel the politicians are indeed very anxious about the verdict because their political future would to a large extent depend on this verdict, especially the future of the ones who were actively involved in the demolition and used it as a reason to gain power at the center.
I think instead of building any masjid or mandir goverment should utilize this place such as build a big storey building which provide free education to the village boy or girls and tribe and uneducated people. Because building any mandir we can't prove how much faith i have towards god instead of put that god in your heart build small mandir and masjid
ReplyDeleteI think that land should be given to build a educational university,so that the people over there will be get benefit from that and this verdict will close.
ReplyDelete