Cashing In On Ayodhya Verdict
SINCE the Supreme Court is the highest arbitrator and interpreter of the law, its verdict is required to be accepted, irrespective of whether one agrees with the verdict or not. But it is indeed an irony that now talks of communal harmony and religious tolerance and brotherhood are coming from those very forces who had launched Ram janmabhoomi movement, taken out Ram Rath yatras, ignited communal flames along its path and demolished Babri Masjid, which had resulted in communal riots almost throughout the country. And not to forget the catapulting of a fringe political party to power by exploiting this very temple-mosque saga. So, the call for “sanity” coming from such a force sounds as a crude joke. The call for respecting the SC verdict is coming from those who had declared that “faith is more important than land records” whenever they had expected the judiciary to pronounce verdict that might not be in consonance with their faith. It can certainly be questioned whether the supporters of the verdict would have accepted it with so much ‘poise’ and ‘liberalism’ had it been different or opposite! If one heavyweight is declaring that the “whole nation has welcomed it”, another says that the verdict is in line with “sentiments of the whole nation”. I wonder through which ‘magical’ mechanism have they reached such a conclusion. Did they undertake any opinion poll covering each and every citizen of the country and all expressing that their ‘sentiment’ is dependent solely on the Ram temple? In a democratic nation, anybody holds legal right to jump in heavenly joy that at last the much-longed Ram temple is coming up! But by which authority can they dare to impose their personal or religious opinion upon the entire people as if those who differ with them do not exist or simply don’t matter. As for those who are saying “all are welcoming it”, question needs to be asked whether there exists any avenue to express contrary opinion without fear of getting hounded, assaulted or prosecuted after getting character assassinated as ‘anti-national’. So now all focus will shift from Ayodhya to Kashi Vishwanath and Krishna janmabhoomi to “purify” the locations from the ‘stigma’ of Gyanvapi and Shahi Idgah.
KAJAL CHATTERJEE, KOLKATA
Law Protectors At Odds
LAST week the country witnessed lawyers and policeman slugging out in Delhi on a petty issue. A silly incident triggered the confrontation: a policeman asked a lawyer not to park his vehicle outside the court premises, which angered the lawyer. The offended lawyer started beating and pushing the policeman on the street. Another lawyer started bashing the policeman on his bike throwing a helmet at the cop. The question before the citizens is: who is above the law? Both lawyers and police personnel serve the public. But the Delhi incident has shown lawyers taking law in their own hand, instead of abiding by it. Lawyers fight verbally in the court to give justice to their clients while outside the court they take law for granted. It is high time lawyers and police personnel are educated on basic ethics.
RAJU R, VASCO