By Syed Khalique Ahmed
NEW DELHI—What should be the reaction of the Muslim leadership in case the court decides in favour of the Hindu petitioners in the cases of Varanasi’s Gyanvapi Masjid and Mathura Shahi Eidgah Masjid that are currently under litigation before the court?
This was the question of the journalists at a press conference of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (JUH) at the Constitution Club of India on Wednesday, December 20. The question was directed to JUH President Maulana Arshad Madani. This was in the context of the illegally demolished Babri Masjid whose site was allotted to the Hindu party despite the Supreme Court conceding in its judgement that the Babri Masjid was not built over the debris of any Hindu temple and that the Babri Masjid was demolished illegally, meaning, the act of demolition of the mosque was a criminal act.
If the verdict, in this case, is analyzed properly, one will certainly conclude that the verdict was a “decision” of the apex court, not “justice” with the Muslim party who fought for their mosque because the top court itself admitted that the title of the land on which the Babri Masjid was built was not in the name of the temple party. All available evidence proved that the land belonged to the Masjid.
But what Maulana Madani said in response to media questions was quite surprising. He asked what one could do if the court decided in favour of the Hindu party when there was no option to appeal any further. In the same vein, he also said that he would accept the verdict of the court in the matter.
The question itself was hypothetical because the Allahabad High Court in the two cases has so far only upheld the lower court’s order to inspect the mosque premises to decide their religious character. It has not pronounced any verdict on it though the Allahabad High Court has categorically stated that the courts have a right to decide the “religious character” which is not defined properly in The Places of Worship Places (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.
The Act makes it crystal clear that the status of worship places would continue to be the same as on August 15, 1947, and no court could order its conversion into worship place of another religion. The Allahabad High Court has not spoken anything about the conversion of the mosques into worship places of another religion.
When there is neither an order of the court with regard to changing the “religious character” of the two premises nor any verdict on altering the two mosques into places of worship of another religion, why should Muslim leaders say in advance that the verdict of the court is acceptable to them? Does it indicate the defeatist mindset of the Muslim leadership and lack of thought and planning on their behalf?
What kind of message such a statement would send to the rival party and also the institutions from where it has become hard to get justice for Muslims for various reasons, particularly in the last decade? Or was this press conference on the pretext of “Promoting communal harmony and national integration” convened to give this statement about a case pending adjudication before the court to pre-empt any adverse reaction from the Muslim community?
Such answers coming from the community’s leadership would only weaken the resolve of the community to fight for justice in sensitive cases like the two mosques and embolden the elements who want to grab the two Masjids by hook or crook. Everybody knows in India that the verdict of the Supreme Court of India is final and can be altered only through a law in Parliament. And Muslims demonstrated their obedience to the law when the Babri Masjid verdict came on November 9, 2019.
So, why make a statement that does not help anyone except those adamant about acquiring the two Masjids? Statements like this are not going to promote communal harmony and strengthen national integration. The community leadership must stand for justice not for itself only but for the weaker, oppressed, and exploited people from all religious communities.
Muslim leaders need to be very cautious to speaking about cases pertaining to Gyanvapi and Mathura Shahi Eidgah mosques which are very sensitive and have the potential to hurt the sensibilities and provoke reactions. The leadership must avoid giving its reactions without studying the entire gamut range of issues pertaining to the subject about which we interact with the media or with rival parties against whom we are fighting the legal battle.
