The Supreme Court on Tuesday suggested an out of the court settlement concerning all parties to find a solution to the Ayodhya temple dispute which is a “sensitive” and “sentimental matter”.
A bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar said that such religious issues can be solved through negotiations and offered to mediate to arrive at an amicable settlement.
“You must make fresh attempts to arrive at a consensual decision. If required, you must choose a moderator to end the dispute. If the parties wants me to sit with mediators chosen by both the sides for negotiations, am ready to take up the task. Even the services of my brother judges can be availed for the purpose,” the bench told BJP leader Subramanian Swamy who had sought an urgent hearing in the matter.
The apex court’s suggestion on the long-standing dispute over the construction of the temple at Babri Masjid site has invited several reactions from all quarters.
Here is how the concerned parties reacted to it:
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
BJP welcomed the Supreme Court’s suggestion of an out-of-court settlement of the Ayodhya dispute, and said aggrieved parties should keep in mind its “sensitivity” while discussing the matter.
“The Supreme Court has called for an out-of-court settlement between the aggrieved parties. The parties should resolve the issue amicably by talking to each other. We welcome this step and I believe they should have talks outside the court,” BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said in New Delhi.
Several BJP leaders such as LK Advani, PP Chaudhary, Giriraj Singh, Uma Bharti and the newly appointed Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister, Yogi Adityanath. Incidentally, Advani and Uma Bharti are accused in the Babri Masjid demolition case.
Subramanian Swamy suggested that the Ram temple should be built at Ram Janambhoomi (birthplace of Ram) while the Masjid (mosque) on the other side of Sarayu river to resolve the Ayodhya issue.
“My suggestion is that Masjid be built on other side of the Sarayu river and Ram Janambhoomi be handed over for Ram Temple. We cannot change the birthplace of Ram, but Masjid can be made anywhere,” he said.
Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP)
VHP which has been spearheading the movement for making the temple, on the other hand, suggested that the Centre must bring out a legislation to build the Ram temple.
“The Union government must bring and pass the law to build Ram Temple in Ayodhya at the birth place of Shreeram (Lord Ram),” VHP chief, Pravin Togadia said.
Zafaryab Jilani, convenor of the Babri Masjid Action Committee
Jilani maintained that the decision cannot be taken outside the court.
“We cannot go for out of court settlement. What Swamy said does not matter. He is gaining publicity just like that as he has no locus standi and we do not want to give him any answer,” he said.
Gulzar Azmi, the Secretary of the Legal Cell of Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind
Gulzar Azmi also echoed similar sentiments and voiced his opinion against going for any out-of-the-court settlement.
“Let the court decide about the land and must give verdict accordingly. But there cannot be any solutions through talks. If it would have been so, things would have resolved long back.”
Maulana Khalid Rashid,All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB)
He alleged that the attempts in the past to resolve the issue were foiled by political parties. “Negotiation have been made in the past a number of times between the two parties. But each time, political parties foiled our attempts…(So), we are of the view that let the Supreme Court decide once and for all,” Rashid said adding that it respects the gesture of the CJI and the sentiments of Hindus.
(With inputs from PTI)
(Feature image source: AFP)