Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The Allahabad High Court’s order two days ago to excavate the Ayodhya site has provoked a controversy particularly because it has been welcomed by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). But when the idea was first mooted by the court last August, the VHP and its allies actually opposed it. In fact, so vehement was their denunciation of the excavation proposal that the court issued a contempt notice to one of their senior leaders, Mahant Ram Chandra Paramhans, who is a party to the Ayodhya title suits.
The cause for the contempt notice was the Mahant’s press statement that there was a ‘‘deep-rooted conspiracy behind the suggestions of excavation in Ayodhya’’ and his warning that ‘‘the Hindu community will not tolerate infringement of their religious rights and a countrywide agitation would follow if any initiative were taken to excavate the site.’’
The Mahant was reacting to an order passed by the high court on August 1, 2002 inviting the views and suggestions of the parties to the proposed ‘‘excavation of the disputed site to find out whether there are foundations of a Hindu temple or any Hindu religious structure prior to the demolition of the disputed structure.’’
Thus, the purpose of the excavation proposal made by the bench comprising Justice Sudhir Narain, Justice S Rafat Alam and Justice Bhanwar Singh was to see whether the foundation of the Babri Masjid was originally of a Hindu religious structure. This in turn was related to one of the issues framed in the title suits: Whether there was a temple on the site prior to the construction of the Babri Masjid.
But, as it happened, both Hindu and Muslim parties reacted adversely in the media to the court’s idea of taking recourse to excavation as a means of adding to the body of archaelogical evidence already adduced before it by both sides. The two sides had produced historians and archaelogists to interpret mainly the recoveries made from the site after the demolition.
On August 20, 2002, the bench took umbrage to the strident tone of the attack made by various VHP leaders and referred to some of the newspaper headlines of that period: ‘‘No point in excavating Ayodhya site: VHP’’ and ‘‘VHP threatens stir against HC order.’’ The court, however, issued the contempt notice only to the Mahant because he alone among the VHP leaders is a party to the title suits. His statements, it said, was ‘‘a threat to the judicial process as such adverse comments undermine the judicial authority and thwart the majesty of the court.’’
Interestingly, as per the court’s record, the main reason for the VHP’s opposition then to the excavation proposal was that it involved shifting of Ram’s idol from the makeshift temple on the disputed site. The court took care of this objection when it finally passed the excavation order on March 5. It specially clarified that the excavation ‘‘shall not disturb any area where the idol of Shri Ram Lalla is’’ and the worship shall go on as before. The VHP has, therefore, changed its stand and welcomed the excavation order.
