The Justice Manmohan Singh Liberhan Commission was set-up on December 16, 1992 by the PV Narasimha Rao government to enquire the December 6, 1992 demolition in Ayodhya. After 17 years it submitted a classified report in June 2009 to Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh which was leaked to the media on November 23, 2009 causing an uproar in the Parliament. This brought the Ayodhya issue in the centre stage of politics. On the Liberhan Commission an amount of Rs. eight crore was spent.
Simple Ayodhya issue has been complicated by Jaichandi Hindus.
The simple fact is that during the Rajiv Gandhi’s prime ministership a Civil Court in Ayodhya ordered to unlock the disputed complex and allowed the Hindus to perform pooja of Sri Ramlala but continued stay on Muslims offering any namaz at this site. Hindus call it Sri Ram’s temple but some Muslims and all Jaichandi Hindus call it the Baburi mosque.
It can not be called a mosque as (i) over a long number of years no namaz was offered at this site, (ii) there were no minarets and (iii) no provision for washing hands and feet of namazies which are a must for a mosque. Structure which was demolished was a functioning temple but in a dilapidated condition so what was done on December 6, was jirnoddhar so as to construct a grand temple. The laying ceremony of first stones for grand temple (shilanyas) was done in 1989 during the prime ministership of Rajiv Gandhi.
Secondly Mir Baqi, a Shia commander of Babur demolished a temple and erected there upon three doms converting it into something like a mosque as per his Shia rites. As it is well known that Shia and Sunni Muslims do not attend each other’s mosques for offering namaz as Sunnis do not recite Shia texts of namaz. Further timings and modes of offering namaz by Shias and Sunnis are different. Therefore Sunnis have no locus standi on Shia mosques and vice versa all over the world.
In Pakistan Shias are burning Sunni mosques and vice versa. Shia dominated new government of Iraq blames Sunni Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria of financing terror in Iraq. In Lucknow and in Varanasi every year during Muharram bloodbath takes place between Shia and Sunni Muslims. Even the Supreme Court has adjudicated on Shia-Sunni disputes in Doshipura of Varanasi, UP.
But strangely the Indian courts have not taken note of these material Shia-Sunni distinctions and liberally issued stay orders on prayers of Sunni Muslim organisations (UP Sunni Wakf Board, etc.) which have no locus standi and no jurisdiction over Shia properties. Therefore it is total miscarriage of justice on part of courts to have allowed interventions by Sunni Muslims and issue stay orders as Sunni Muslims can not claim to be aggrieved parties in this case because Sunnis do not and can not offer namaz in Shia mosques. Therefore all interventions and prayers of Sunni Muslims or Sunni associations in the Ayodhya case should be declared by courts to be not maintainable ab initio and dismissed without further delay paving the way for construction of a grand temple.
(The writer served as Ambassador/High Commissioner to many countries and belongs to the 1971 batch of the Indian Foreign Service. He is available at www.opgupta.org)