It appears that the Prime Minister has recovered his breath and begun directing the government’s and the Congress Party’s retreat from the brink. This message comes fairly loud clear from the proceedings and the resolution of the extended meeting of the Congress Working Committee on Thursday. Though party spokesman VN Gadgil had said a day earlier that Congress would not seek de-recognition of Bharatiya Janata Party, it would have been risky to take him at his word in view of Mr Arjun Singh’s contrary stand and his track record of outmanoeuvring Mr PV Narasimha Rao in recent months. Since the demand is not reported to have figured at the extended meeting of the Working Committee, it can now be assumed that Mr Rao will either not allow Arjun Singh to revive it or will not yield to his ‘pressure.’
Since support for Mr Arjun Singh in the Congress Parliamentary Party is known to be quite limited, there was no good reason even earlier for Mr Rao to have allowed him to set the government’s agenda. One possible explanation is lack of clarity on Mr Rao’s own part on how to handle the Ramjanambhoomi issue. On December 6, he, of course, lost his nerve and committed himself to a course of action which has been commented upon in this space earlier.
It is fairly widely known that the cell set up in the Prime Minister’s office last summer to assess, on the basis of available material and archaeological evidence, whether a temple existed on the site where the contentious Babri structure stood, had come to the conclusion that 95 per cent of the evidence supported the Hindu case. But this fact was not publicly disclosed. Indeed when the dismissed UP chief minister Kalyan Singh quoted Mr Sharad Pawar as having told him in the presence of the Prime Minister that a temple existed in the site, the defence minister called him a liar.
For reasons which are not difficult to fathom, a number of so-called media persons have gone on asserting in their ‘reports’ that the Muslim leaders have been committed to harden their claim to the site in case it is established that a temple stood there. This is just not true. Syed Shahabuddin had been rash enough to make such a statement. But he had subsequently qualified it and indeed other Muslim leaders had said that the site (and not the structure) was the crux of the matter for them on the ground that once a congregational prayer has been held on a site it belongs to the community in perpetuity. This is truly fantastic since it is well known in Bombay and other large cities congregations on the Id day spill over to adjoining roads and pavements.
The point that is sought to be made is that while disclosure of the findings of the cell in the Prime Minister’s office would not have helped resolve the dispute, in view of the stand of Muslim leaders, it would have angered them, if not Muslims generally. Perhaps the fear that Mr Arjun Singh would use this as a handle against him dissuaded Mr Rao.
This raises an even larger issue. The government cannot possibly adopt a sensible course so long as it remains terrorised by the fear of Muslims and loss of Muslim support in elections. The government should do what, in its best judgment, is good for the country and not be obsessed by the next poll. Even expediency demands such a course of action. The price of Muslim support has become too high for the Congress.
Permission for the public darshan of the idols in the makeshift structure is a case in point. In view of the pressure of public opinion, it is only proper that the Union government should have given the permission some days ago. But home minister SB Chavan, whether on his own or a hint from the PMO, has passed on the responsibility to the UP government. This is rather extraordinary not only because UP is under President’s rule but also because the Centre is known to be unhappy about the Governor and is actually looking for a replacement, which means that in its own assessment the set-up in Lucknow is not competent.
Meanwhile, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad HC has got seized of the decision and is scheduled to hear two petitions on Saturday. That is how matters got greatly complicated earlier. The judiciary no longer offers exit routes to the government.s Since I do not know the law, I am not competent to say whether it was open to Lucknow judges to refuse to entertain the petitions. But there can be no dispute that the issue is not one of land but of law and order which even the most activist of our judges would perhaps recognise is solely the domain of the executive. And it is quite possible, in fact likely, that similar petitions will be moved in other high courts and entertained. In that event, the SC will have to get them transferred to itself. Meanwhile, the agitation will build up among the devotees and the sadhus.
That apart, however, if the Union government is keen on restoring normalcy, it should announce, or at least let it be known through its usual method of inspired reports in the media, that elections in UP, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh will be held within six months and that it will not seek an extension of President’s rule.
This will help reassure the BJP that a constitutional remedy is open to it and direct its energies in that direction. This is the logic of the Prime Minister’s apparently firm decision not to ban the BJP and or seek derecognition. He must be constant in order to be able to resist Mr Arjun Singh. Mr. Singh it must be admitted, has a consistent programme of action. He is willing to accept the verdict of the people in the four states “within a year”, provide the BJP is banned or derecognised.
Meanwhile, we have to wait and watch the impact of the Pakistan government’s decision to inflame Indian Muslim public opinion. The signs are not propitious in view of the refusal of Indian Muslim leaders to rebuff Islamabad despite destruction of scores of temples in Pakistan. But it would be rash to reach any conclusion at this stage.
The Observer of Business and Politics, 26 December 1992