By IANS
New Delhi : The government Friday took back its controversial affidavit that challenged the existence of Hindu god Ram and sought three months to “re-scrutinize” the Sethusamudram shipping canal project.
Making a dramatic U-turn in the same court where it had earlier maintained that there was no evidence to prove the existence of Lord Ram and other characters in the Hindu epic Ramayana, the government Friday said it had “total respect for all religions, and Hinduism in particular, in the context of the present case”.
A bench headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan then accepted the government’s plea and gave it three months to review the project, which seeks to develop a shorter sea route around the Indian peninsula.
Many argue that dredging in the sea dividing India and Sri Lanka would damage Ram Sethu, which Hindus believe was built by a monkey army to help Ram cross the sea and get into the kingdom of Lanka to battle Ravana.
Scientists say there is no archaeological evidence to support the contention and that the bridge is a natural formation of sandbars.
Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium sought to withdraw the earlier and told the court: “The central government is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities, including the unique, ancient and holy text of the Ramayana.
“The government assures all concerned that all materials will be re-scrutinized with care and circumspection, including any alternative suggestions.
“The central government is also keen that its decisions bind and bring the society together, rather than cause any disruption in the religious and social psyche of one true India.”
Subramanium told the court that “having regard to public sentiment and also the fact that representations, including additional material, are being brought to the attention of the government since the filing of this affidavit, the central government withdraws the present affidavit to re-examine the entire matter”.
The earlier affidavit, he went on, “did not, at any point of time intend to touch upon the freedom/articles of faith or belief of any section of society.
“The central government respects the sentiments of each and every individual citizen within the parameters of the constitution and acknowledges every citizen’s fundamental right to feel a part of the composite cultural and religious heritage of the country.”
It was the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) that filed the offending affidavit, which triggered widespread protests organised mainly by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
During the arguments, former union minister and Janata Party president Subramanium Swamy, one of the petitioners, contended that the government was in possession of some relevant documents to support his cause of building the shorter navigational sea route without damaging the Ram Sethu.
He pleaded to the bench to direct the government to hand over those documents to him.
Subramanium readily agreed and told him to write a letter to the government for procuring those documents.
Permitting the government to withdraw the affidavit, the bench adjourned the matter without amending its Aug 31 order, which restrained the government from causing any damage to the Ram Sethu during the execution of the shipping canal project.
The developments in the Supreme Court came as the Congress brushed aside the demand of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) asking Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi to apologize over the earlier affidavit.
Congress spokesman Abishekh Singhvi told reporters here that now that the mistake had been rectified, the government needed to be praised, not criticized.”It calls for kudos, not criticism,” he said.
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) surprisingly appeared to speak in different voices.
While the politburo welcomed the withdrawal of the earlier affidavit, CPI-M veteran and former West Bengal chief minister Jyoti Basu said the government’s admission of mistake might be linked to planned early elections.
“The UPA (United Progressive Alliance) has backtracked on the affidavit so as not to squander its chances in the event of a poll,” he said in Kolkata. “It says something and then does the opposite thing.”
In Shimla, CPI-M politburo member Sitaram Yechury said: “It is improper to interfere in the religious affairs of any community as the constitution provides protection to all religions in the country.”