Opinion The Urdu press: Waiting for verdict
The editorial goes onto say that, “instead, in Court, the Hindu side focussed on the question of the birthplace of Lord Ram and puja rights. The Court had asked for a mediation panel, which has now given its report.”
A space for the future 
Etemad reflects on what the Supreme Court had said before the trial began.
The hearings before a Constitution bench for title rights to the land where the Babri Masjid stood ended a week ago. Urdu dailies have extensive reports on it and Etemad, the Hyderabad-based AIMIM’s daily, published an editorial on the subject on October 17.
Etemad reflects on what the Supreme Court had said before the trial began. The editorial says: “It (SC) had said it would hear only those sides that had appealed the Allahabad High Court order and no new side. It rejected Subramaniam Swamy’s plea to be heard. It also said that only the title suit would be heard and no other claims.” The editorial goes onto say that, “instead, in Court, the Hindu side focussed on the question of the birthplace of Lord Ram and puja rights. The Court had asked for a mediation panel, which has now given its report.”
The editorial says that “all eyes are now focussed on what the Court says. In this, news has emerged that one party and person, the chairman of the Sunni Waqf Board, against whom an FIR had been registered, has retreated from the case and this has created immense restlessness amongst Muslims.” The editorial asserts: “Muslim ulema, intellectuals and politicians have all said that the Supreme Court ruling must be respected. But no Hindu side has said this.”
Munsif, on the same day, has an extensive report on its front page. It raises question marks (literally) over the talk of a “deal” between some Hindu and Muslim parties. It quotes the Shahi Imam of Delhi’s Jama Masjid, Ahmed Bukhari, asking why there is saudebaazi (deal-making) at the lamhe-aakhir (last moment).
Mumbai-based Urdu Times on October 16 published an editorial, ‘Masjid ka Maamla’ (The Masjid matter). It gives its view, wherein it holds that the Hindu side has failed to establish that there was a mandir on the ground that was destroyed to build the Babri Masjid, or that it stood where the Babri Masjid was. The editorial outlines the arguments laid down in Court by both sides. “These arguments in Court will determine which side gets the land,” it says. The editorial ends on an interesting note: “If the Court decides on the logic of arguments presented before them, then it should be clear that the top Court is still not overwhelmed by Hindutva and is still unaffected or pure — untouched by Hindutva sentiments.”
Restive over NRC
Inquilab on October 14 ran an editorial on the NRC (National Register of Citizens), calling it a “new fancy” (naya shosha). It mentions a “central minister” (unnamed) who dropped a naya shosha in a rally in Mumbai’s Bhendi Bazaar, stating that NRC is not for Indian Muslims but for foreigners.
The minister did not reveal where or how he discovered that Muslims are scared, or did he think it necessary to advise Indian Muslims about not being scared, before they are scared?” The paper argues: “Then, another question arises. Why did he deem it necessary to say this? Actually, by framing the NRC as a Hindu-Muslim question, it makes it clear that not only daal mein kucch na kucch kaala hai, balki poori daal kaali hai. Now, is it that blackness has crept in because of the compulsion to bring in black money?” The editorial mixes metaphors and goes on: “Or, is it that people are trying to keep their hands clean of their attempt to clean corruption?” It concludes that through several contradictory statements, ministers and leaders of the ruling party are deliberately trying to keep the people in the dark about the whole thing (NRC exercise).
Siasat has an editorial on October 9, on “(Bangladesh Prime Minister) Sheikh Hasina’s silence over the NRC”. On October 12, it poses a more direct question, asking, “Who is the intended target of the NRC?” It claims: “The government is trying to divert the focus from burning issues that need peoples’ attention. And this policy of diversion is being concretely implemented as the new NRC is being spoken of for all India.” It has harsh things to say about India’s social atmosphere. “After Assam, West Bengal was made a centre and all issues that spread disagreement, hate and division in society are being spread there”.
The newspaper argues that “(Home Minister) Amit Shah is so obsessed with NRC that he can see no other issues pertaining to the common man. It appears that this is not a matter of home affairs alone but the entire central government is taking this on, on a war footing.” It elaborates that all ministers holding different portfolios are also talking of NRC, which “makes it clear that before all ministers, peoples’ issues have no significance”.
Nobel pursuits
Editorials have lauded the Nobel to Indian-origin and educated economist, Abhijit Banerjee. Banerjee andEsther Duflo’s work on combating poverty has also been discussed at length.
The October 17 editorial in Inquilab says: “(Abhijit Banerjee) has used many opportunities to point out the problems with the Indian economy, but his viewpoint has been ignored and there has been no attempt to use his talent, skills or expertise. The government tried during demonetisation to paint all these experts as communist and as those with Leftist views.” It asks if labelling people like this is not an “insult to their knowledge and status in the world?”
Siasat on October 16 has an editorial devoted to Banerjee. It talks about the need for strong and concrete policies to battle poverty. It says: “They offer lessons which need to be learned by those in developing countries, where the problem of poverty exists.”
Share
