AA Edit | Rule Of Law Must Prevail In Ayodhya, Other Cases

Caught off guard by the massive theft at the Ram temple in Ayodhya which it has assiduously planned and developed as the icon of its brand of politics, the Sangh Parivar is now making an attempt to present the act before society as a social crime much beyond those under the Indian penal system. It has made the first step towards this effort with the Uttar Pradesh unit of the BJP announcing that the thieves will face social boycott “reflecting the sentiments of Hindu society”. The BJP has pointed to a resolution passed by the Faizabad Bar Association that none of its members will represent the eight accused arrested in the case and that a lawyer who goes against the decision will face a Rs 5-lakh penalty. The lawyers have also issued an ultimatum — the three people associated with the temple management — Champat Rai, Anil Mishra and Gopal Rao — “must leave” Ayodhya within three days or else the entire city would be blockaded.

The Ram temple was built as per the whims of the Sangh Parivar after destroying a historical mosque, an act the Supreme Court called an “egregious violation of the rule of law”. It’s true that the temple has come up on a later order of the Supreme Court and that the perpetrators of violence managed to go scot free but the underlying disregard by the Parivar for the rule of law and the thought process that made it all happen are etched on every brick that has gone into the construction of the temple.

The BJP’s talk of social boycott and the lawyers’ warnings echo the warning of Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath to those who seek accountability that “they should not test Ram devotees". A republic built and run on democratic processes and administration of criminal justice cannot approve of this thought process. It is an attempt to revisit the violence of the 1990s which must be resisted. All those who seek to dictate terms of the punishment to be meted out to the accused, if and when found guilty, must be made to understand that they cannot impose a penalty of its own. They are not a law unto themselves.

It is true that the wrongdoings related to the temple must have hurt the devotees of the lord as well as those who worked for decades for the realisation of the project. The party which rules Uttar Pradesh and runs the government at the Centre had all the time and opportunities to ensure that the donations of the devotees are put to their intended use. Having failed to do that, the very same people now come up with complicated arguments with the aim of avoiding further scrutiny of their lapses. They may have been successful in whipping up passions for the construction of the temple but are unlikely to succeed in camouflaging the heist there.

Much worse is the position of the lawyers. Every accused has a right to fair trial and being represented by an advocate. Individual lawyers can pick their clients but to issue a threat to the fraternity against representing someone is against the law. It is sad that the lawyer community is consumed by rhetoric and takes illegal and anti-constitutional positions. They must correct themselves, and do so at the earliest. If not, statutory bodies mandated to discipline lawyers must step in fast.