By IANS,
New Delhi: Home Minister P. Chidambaram Thursday resolutely stood by the Liberhan Commission report on the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, and said the judge had strictly gone by the brief assigned to him.
Replying to a 10-hour short duration discussion spread over two days in the Rajya Sabha on the Liberhan Commission report and the government’s Action Taken Report on it, he also said the Sangh Parivar’s behaviour on Dec 6, 1992, when the mosque was brought down “cannot be accepted in a pluralistic society.”
“The judge has answered the questions put to him… Facts to the best of his ability have been brought out by the judge,” the home minister said, answering criticism from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) that the report was incomplete as Justice (retd) M.S. Liberhan had not gone into the genesis of the Ramjanambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.
“The Liberhan Commission understood the scope of the enquiry. It was not asked to rule on the ownership issue,” Chidambaram pointed out in his hour-long reply to the debate.
“That issue should be reserved for the title suit,” he said, adding: “We are not here to decide on the title suit.”
Reading extensively from the report that indicts some 68 members of the Sangh parivar, Chidambaram said: “Obviously, one side feels hurt but we also feel strongly at the damage done to the essence of the country by the demolition.”
“If there is one point in recent history when the Hindu-Muslim gulf became a chasm, it was Dec 6 and we are trying our best to bridge it,” Chidambram said.
Answering criticism of the ATR that not enough had been done, the minister pointed out that the document was reflective of the Liberhan Commission’s recommendations.
“If the recommendation was tepid, then the action taken is tepid. If the recommendation was pointed, the response is pointed. If the recommendation is of a general nature, the response is like that,” he said.
At the same time, he said the conclusions contained in the report “need to be studied carefully to decide if the government was obliged to take action. We have to examine what action, if any, should be taken against the people who collected and received money for hatching the conspiracy of the demolition.”
“Huge funds were collected. The CBI has collected evidence. We have to examine what action can be taken, who collected and got what,” he added.
“It also needs to be examined if the list of names in the FIR relating to the conspiracy needs to be expanded,” the minister.
Chidambaram was repeatedly interrupted by BJP members during his reply but steadfastly refused to yield. Such was the pandemonium created by BJP MP Vinay Katiyar that Deputy Chairman K. Rahman Khan had to warn that he would be asked to withdraw if he did not resume his seat.
At one stage, a visibly irritated Chidambaram asked: “Since when the BJP become so intolerant that it won’t permit a minister to make a reply?”
The discussions went along expected lines with the Congress and non-BJP parties roundly flaying the radical Hindu groups for the demolition and the BJP justifying the act but not owning up for it, even as it rejected the Liberhan Commission report.
Participating in the discussion on Wednesday, Leader of Opposition Arun Jaitley had termed the report a “national joke”.
Muslim MPs, regardless of their party affiliation, were particularly harsh on the BJP and more than one member asked for the mosque to be reconstructed, even as they spoke of the need to move ahead.
Intervening in the discussion, Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal termed the BJP’s position on the Babri Masjid demolition a “national shame”, and said the BJP was taking the country in a wrong direction “in the name of Lord Ram”.
“Don’t make false arguments. You will regret it tomorrow. You are taking the country in a wrong direction — that too, in the name of Lord Ram,” Sibal maintained.
Rejecting the BJP’s contention that the demolition of the Babri mosque was a spontaneous act, Sibal said the demolition was “a scripted exercise” carried out for political purposes.
“Lord Ram made a sacrifice to keep promise of his father. You want use his name to come to power,” he said, asking if Lord Ram was alive, would he have carried out a rath yatra?
“He would have worked for better education and health,” the minister said.