:: Jayanthi Natrajan

Tainted credibility

By Jayanthi Natarajan

APR 13 : The BJP has flooded the Internet with a slogan calling L.K. Advani a decisive leader. As a member of the Congress party, and as a concerned citizen, I reproduce below a compilation sent to me by a friend on Mr Advani’s opportunistic and constant flip-flop on just one issue — an issue which the BJP claims to be the core of their ideology, namely the Ram Mandir. It must be remembered that this flip-flop cannot be attributed to the compulsions of coalition government, but are purely Mr Advani’s own views at various times.

2009, before the elections

In his election campaign speech, Mr Advani again raked up the Ram Mandir issue. He said that it was the BJP’s resolve to build the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.

He said that the issue of Ram Mandir had catapulted the BJP to power at the Centre earlier and that the party has not forgotten its promise. Mr Advani said this while addressing Rashtra Raksha Vijay Sankalp Rally in Gorakhpur on February 29, 2009.

April 2009, BJP manifesto contradicts Mr Advani

The BJP manifesto has avoided promising legislation to build Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, with Mr Advani resisting pressure from within the party and the Sangh Parivar to include such a commitment. Sources said that the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate did not want any controversy that would annoy the allies and shift focus from the agenda of good governance. The manifesto says: "There is an overwhelming desire of the people in India and abroad to have a grand temple at the birthplace of Shri Ram in Ayodhya. The BJP will explore all possibilities, including negotiations and judicial proceedings, to facilitate the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya".

2004, before the elections

"My partymen chop it out of my speeches, but I won’t avoid it. It’s an emotional and sensitive issue, but I won’t be apologetic about it", to Time magazine on April 19, 2004. "We will build a Ram temple at Ayodhya", Mr Advani declared at the rally in Ayodhya in May 2004. "India will be Ram’s kingdom once more".

Reported in Business Line, October 29, 2004

At the BJP’s national council meeting in New Delhi, Mr Advani described Ayodhya as the "most potent mass movement in India, post-Independence" and announced that the Ram temple will be built at any cost. Neither leading a coalition government nor facing any major election in any important state for the time being, it is natural for the BJP to shed its mask of being an inclusive party and for its leader to proclaim: "Our commitment to the Ram temple in Ayodhya is intact and unwavering. The nation eagerly looks forward to the day the makeshift temple at Ram Janmabhoomi is replaced by a structure befitting the greatness of Lord Ram".

In 2002

"The Ayodhya movement was not aimed at building the Ram temple by using force but to convert a de facto temple into a de jure temple under the process of law or by mutual agreement between disputing parties. The movement and slogans (by karsevaks) have to be seen in the background of the whole controversy which emphasises that the de facto temple needs to be converted to a de jure temple by process of law, which can be achieved either by mutual agreement, court order or by legislation but nothing has to be done by force or any illegal manner", Mr Advani said.

Mr Advani, who was one of the top BJP leaders present at the kar seva organised at Ayodhya on that day, said the movement was not "just for building a temple but to build it at a place where Lord Ram is believed to have been born".

to the Liberhan Commission, December 3, 2002

Asked by the Commission’s counsel Anupam Gupta if he did not end his speeches with the slogan "Kasam Ram ki khate hain, mandir wahin banainge (we take a pledge in the name of Lord Ram that the temple will be built at the same place)", Mr Advani said, "It is possible, I don’t remember".

All over the country there are widespread protests regarding criminalisation of politics. However, it is vitally important for us to always remember that the man who would be Prime Minister stands chargesheeted in what is possibly the worst hate crime in Indian history, namely the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

L.K. Advani and his colleagues, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharati, faced two charges in two courts — delivering inflammatory speeches on December 6, 1992, prior to the demolition, and hatching a conspiracy to demolish the mosque since 1990. Immediately after the mosque was demolished, two first information reports (FIRs) were filed in the same police station. One was filed at 5.15 pm against "lakhs of unknown kar sevaks" for offences committed at 12.15 pm, mainly the demolition. Spread of communal hate was one of them. Conspiracy was not alleged since the facts were not known then and no particular person was cited either. This was crime number 197 (demolition).

The next FIR, filed only 10 minutes later, was crime no 198 (speeches) against eight named persons — L.K. Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharati, Ashok Singhal, Giriraj Kishore, V.H. Dalmiya, Vinay Katiyar and Ritambara. It alleged that they had delivered inflammatory speeches at 10 am, prior to the demolition (Section 153A IPC). This charge was common to both FIRs. FIR 198 (speeches) said also that "during the speeches of these leaders, repeated indications (sic: incitement) were given to demolish the mosque. As a result, lakhs of kar sevaks attacked and pulled down the disputed structure". The leaders were named because their identities were known. Conspiracy was properly not alleged in either FIR because it requires a long probe. There were 47 other FIRs for offences against the media.

After the imposition of President’s Rule in Uttar Pradesh, the demolition case (197) was assigned to the CBI while the state police dealt with the speeches case (198). Both were parts of the same transaction and were linked inseparably. Eventually, the CBI was assigned the speeches case as well. The CBI, therefore, submitted a composite, damning chargesheet in court on October 5, 1993. But there was a technical flaw in the assignment of the cases to courts which was pointed out by Justice Jagdish Bhalla of the Allahabad high court on February 12, 2001. He struck down as invalid the reference of case 198 (speeches) to the Lucknow court from the Rae Bareli court. His judgment of February 12, 2001, upheld everything else, including the joint chargesheet. He thrice said that the defect was "curable" by another notification after consulting the high court. Obviously, justice required that the two cases, 197 (demolition) and 198 (speeches), be tried together in one court. For very obvious reasons, successive UP governments failed to cure the defects. However, the rest of the chargesheet stands, even today.

Is this a person who should be even projected as a prime ministerial candidate? Every thinking Indian citizen would say "no".

Jayanthi Natarajan is a Congress MP in the Rajya Sabha and AICC spokesperson.

The views expressed in this column are her own