There has been needless speculation regarding the Supreme Court verdict in the matter pertaining to the civil dispute in the Ram Janmabhumi-Babri Masjid controversy, following the culmination of hearings earlier this week. The despairing part of the deliberations, which took place on various news channels, has been that an attempt was being made to second-guess the judgement. In fact, the debate was more political than it was legal, and this has been the pattern ever since the issue of the disputed structure came onto the centre stage of national politics, after the locks were opened during the tenure of Rajiv Gandhi in the mid-eighties.
The Ram Janmabhumi-Babri Masjid feud transformed itself into a mega subject, rather by accident than by design. The Congress government unlocked the gates to garner support amongst the Hindus, and subsequently Rajiv Gandhi initiated his campaign for the 1989 elections after conducting a shilanyas performed at the place where Lord Rama was believed to have been born. The primary plank of that election was corruption and the Bofors gun deal became the focal point of a collective Opposition onslaught. The shilanyas backfired on the Congress, and the Muslims switched absolute loyalty towards Vishwanath Pratap Singh and the Janata Dal.
The Janata Dal government wrested power from the Congress when both the Left parties, as well as the BJP, declared their support to it from outside. The inner power-tussle within the JD, where Chandrashekhar attempted to dislodge V.P. Singh, resulted in the last ditch efforts made by the then Prime Minister to save his dispensation. He left the political class askance announcing the implementation of the Mandal Commission, resulting in widespread social tensions across the country.
The BJP, under L.K. Advani, at that juncture, interpreted the Mandal move as a clear-cut method of dividing Hindu society. It was hardly surprising that Advani, an astute and media-savvy player, seized the opportunity to make both himself, and his party relevant in the emerging scenario. He embarked on a Somnath to Ayodhya Rath Yatra, thus igniting the issue, and recasting it into a Mandal versus Kamandal debate. Advani surfaced from the shadows of his senior colleague, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, as the numero uno leader of the saffron brigade, and his declaration of the withdrawal of support from the V.P. Singh government, following his arrest in Bihar, led to its fall. By affirming that the question of Lord Rama’s birth was non-justiciable, since it was a matter of faith, Advani put all his adversaries on the defensive.
Not too many people are aware of the fact that the RSS was not consulted prior to the Rath Yatra but simply informed of the decision. Bhaurao Deoras, younger brother of then Sarsangchalak, Balasaheb Deoras, had in the meanwhile developed a close rapport with Rajiv Gandhi, occasionally counselling him on fragile topics. He played a pivotal role in unlocking the gates and accomplishing the shilanyas poojan. Sensing that the Mandir imbroglio had the ingredients of becoming a major election floorboard, in 1990 itself, Chandrashekhar, who succeeded V.P. Singh as the Prime Minister, worked out a proposal in consultation with the then UP Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav.
Realising that once the Ram temple tangle was unknotted, it would strengthen Chandrashekhar since he would receive the backing of the Sangh as well, Rajiv Gandhi, whose party was supporting the government from outside, requested Bhaurao Deoras not to endorse the formula. On the day it was to be announced, to the satisfaction of all, the RSS rejected this proposal during the 8 am news broadcast on All India Radio.
The BJP turned out to be the biggest beneficiary of this “Ram Baan” unleashed by Advani; from a party of two MPs in 1984, it started its upward journey. If today, it has over 300 seats of its own, the foundation of this polarisation and arousal of the Hindutva sentiment, was primarily because of this movement gaining momentum. The rest is history since Prime Minister Narendra Modi and a host of other leaders benefited from this arrow.
Therefore, when one looks at the political dimensions of a largely legal matter, pertaining to a long pending property dispute, it is unlikely that all would go down well, once the verdict is given. It would have been far prudent had this issue been resolved through mediation, with the Muslims withdrawing their claim over the disputed land as a gesture of good will. In reciprocity, the Hindu groups, particularly the VHP, should have declared, that in future, no other disputes regarding construction or demolition of temples would be made a part of political discourse. As matters stand today, this is unlikely to happen.
This is the reason why the Supreme Court is expected to play a major part in ending the deadlock. It is widely being anticipated that the judgement would be delivered before 17 November, when the current Chief Justice, Ranjan Gogoi retires. Several questions crop up: should the CJI have been a part of the bench in the first place since his term was ending, and the parties subsequently could go in for a curative or a review petition. What would be the outcome if the other judges demand more time to reach their inferences? Can justice be held hostage by a prescribed timeline?
The only certain thing is that the political game would not halt, even after the Apex Court comes to a conclusive verdict. Just before Diwali, the contention over the precise place where Rama was born remains unresolved. Between us.