our principles, it is a question of survival of all people in this country who are committed to the principles of secularism, communal harmony and national unity.
I do not want to say very much because so much has been said already. There is no alternative at the moment to the decisions of the Supreme Court. The only alternative is chaos and anarchy. If we want to spread anarchy throughout the country, may be some people have an idea that they will halp them, then of course that is an alternative to carrying out the orders of the court. Nobody in their senses can be party to that.
As far as the minorities in this country are concerned, I want to assure them on the floor of this House that as far as our parties here are concerned, we confider that democracy in India cannot be complete without assuring the protection and defence of the rights of the minorities and we are pledged to do that, whatever our capacity may be. It has not been always followed, I regret to say.
My friend Mr. Vajpayee quoted Pandit Nehru and I am glad that he picked up that quotation because that quotation in Pandit Nehru's own inimitable language is a quotation which gives the highest priority to what we call the composite culture of this country, which is evolved over centuries which is not something which has been imposed by anybody or can be imposed by anybody. It is a composite culture which has deep historical roots and traditions. So many people from outside also came to this country and were absorbed here into our civilisation and our culture. It was that culture that Pandit Nehru was referring to, in that statement which Mr. Vajpayee read out. It belongs to all of us. It does not matter which religion we profess, but that composite culture belongs to all of us. but that is a concept which is frequently challenged by fundamentalists and by my friends of the BJP.
So, we must understand what we are fighting for. This
603 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
[Sh. Indrajit Gupta]
crisis-building every three or four months is not, I think, motivated by any deep religious faith. It is motivated by a cynical politicking for getting votes. That is what is being repeated here again. Whether this game-plan will succeed or not, time will show.
The other day I had asked the Prime Minister here when we were meeting him: "Sir, what is your estimate of the game-plan being this thing which is going on now in Ayodhaya?" What is the game-plan behind it? Because if the Government of Uttar Pradesh, if the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh really does something, it is openly a violation of the court's order. Here in this statement by the Home Minister today, there are repeated references to the Uttar Pradesh State Government's assurances given before the Supreme Court, including affidavits where they say that the court's order will be respected and it will not be violated. If the State Government and the Chief Minister go back on this and do anything which amounts to an open violation of the court's orders,then that Government also will go. It will not remain. It will not be allowed to remain-356 or anything else.
So, why should my friends, who are intelligent people, who have managed some how or other, to get within their clutches the Government of the biggest State in this country, willingly throw it away? Nobody does that. You would not do it. I would not do it. It is all very well to say: "Oh, we will become martyrs in the cause of the temple and, next, people will give us more votes." That is all speculation. It is a gamble. Nobody knows what will happen-whether the people will give them more votes or less votes. But, Sir, a bird in the hands is worth two in the bush. When you have got this Government your clutches, you don't easily give it up by doing something foolish.
604 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
I am trying to understand what is the logic, the mechanics, behind this game-plan which undolds every three or four monthsgoing up the hills towards the brink and then climbing down. How many times is this going to be repeated? How will you carry conviction to your own people?
After all, if you really believe that this mosque was built on the ruins of a temple which had been destroyed, which was standing there before, then, I think, my friend should have agreed to that offer of a single point reference to the court. The single point reference was on this question and findings of the court would have been by nature of an opinion on that, not any binding judgment but, of course, the opinion of the Supreme Court is a wighty thing. They rejected that.
You may say that one should not quote people who may be wrongly quoted. I agree. But the fact of the matter is that Mr. Kalyan Singh is reported to have said that the Defence Minister in the presence of the Prime Minister had advised him that you should agree to this single point reference because the opinion, which will be given, will be in your favour, but he did not agree. He was not convinced by Mr.
Sharad Pawar's argument.
THE MINISTER OF DEFENCE (SHRI SHARAD PAWAR): The words' In favour are not correct.
SHRI INDRAJIT GUPTA: Home Minister is not here. I wanted to ask him to reply to one or two points when he replies at the end.
I want to ask him, for example, that if people who have assumed office at any level, do so after taking a solemn oath on the Constitution of India, is it permissible? I am not talking about the legal side of it, but is it permissible for people to violate basic principles of the same Constitution on which they have taken an oath before they come
605 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
[Sh. Indrajit Gupta]
and sit here? Is it permissible morally? I do not know the reply. If there are people who openly instigate people outside against the court, against the rule of law, then who is to take action? If any action is to be taken, you can a say that the court can start contempt proceedings against them SUO MOTU. But what about the Government? Has it got any view on this matter?
Sir, Section 123, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the Representation of People's Act deals with corrupt practices, as among the grounds which may open you to the danger of being disqualified. Is this appeal to religious symbols meant for getting votes from people? I think you will not contradict me that in your Chamber, Sir, more than once, in the presence of all the leaders.....
MR. SPEAKER: Should we discuss here what we discussed in the Chamber?
SHRI INDRAJITGUPTA: No,this is not that kind of a thing. But Mr.
Advani has said it so many times there that the only reason that his party, which was nothing in UP before the last elections, was able to win so many seats and come to power was the temple. Is the temple not a religious symbol which was used for getting votes? Is it permissible? I do not know whether it is permissible legally or morally
SHRI SHARAD PAWAR: Sixteen MLAs In Maharashtra have been
SHRI INDRAJIT GUPTA: Courts have disqualified a number of
legislators in Maharashtra. [Interruptions]
606 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
SHRI NITISH KUMAR: MR. Speaker, Sir, please issue notices to these people..... [Interruptions]
MR. SPEAKER: Whatever we discuss there if the same is discussed here then there will be no discussion later on. [Interruptions] [English]
SHRI INDRAJIT GUPTA: He has told on the floor of the house also.
it is enough for somebody to claim that they came to power in UP on the basis of an appeal for the temple misusing the name of Ram Bhagwan. They have done it. Is it permissible under the Representation of People's Act in a secular country? So everything is being violated including the Constitution, rule of law, the court's orders and everything. And still we are supposed to have democracy and because we have a democratic Constitution and country, they are to be permitted to do whatever they like.We are nowvery near the brink, Sir. 6th December is only three days away from now. If they have courage of the convictions, if the BJP and VHP really have the courage of the convictions about which they are talking everyday , then I expect them to mount this crisis to the climax, whatever the risk may be for that.
There is a risk; their Government will go. If they are prepared to face that, then I will presume that they will go right up to the climax. Otherwise there will be an anti-climax for the second time and then, they will have to give explanations to their own people. Why have they been collected from all over the country ad why they have brought them there? What for? I agree with Mr. Arjun Singh that is is high time that their bluff was called. Bluff should be called . I believe it is a bluff and nothing more. That bluff should be called and we should not be so apprehensive about
607 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
[Sh. Indrajit Gupta]
things. Of course, I am very apprehensive about one thing. In this surcharged atmosphere, any small provocation here and there or somewhere may lead to some unfortunate disturbances or some clashes which may result in great harm and loss of life or property or anything. And the sufferers will be the minorities mainly. That is my main apprehension. otherwise, we would like to see how they execute this game plan. I think they are going away to the battlefield! Mr.
Advani and Mr. Murali Manohar Joshi have gone there, leaving Atal Behari Vajpayee ji here. This also has got some game plan behind it.
he is an old friend of mine. It is a part of the game plan. Earlier, it was said all their MPs should not go there and some must remain here in order to defend their slogans and their struggle. but what a poor defence we heard just now from Mr. Vajpayee! It is half-hearted and there is not conviction in it and there is no fire in it.Then, what is all this coming to? it is going to fizzle out. I am quite sure of it. If the rest of there country stands firm, if the government stands firm and does not begin to tremble at the Knees, this game plan will fizzle out.
But every time we should not be taken by surprise. All the secular forces should be vigilant not only when the crisis breaks out, but rest of the time also, they should go out and ecducate and teach the people. People do not know so much about what is in the Constitution or what is in the law. You know Sir, unfortunately due to so many causes, very few people in our country can tell you what is written in the various Articles of the Constitution. They are very busy with their bread and butter problems everyday. Many of them are not even educated and literate. How do they know as to what is written in our Constitution or in the Supreme Court's order? Taking advantage of that, somebody should not try, in this dishonest way, in this 608 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
cynical way, to misuse those people for this kind of purpose.
Finally, I should also say that I am not at all satisfied with the statement of the Home Minister. The Home Minister's statement says everything except what the Government proposes to do. Of course, he will say why he should spell it out. But here, he must assure us, in terms of the confidence that was expressed by the NIC, that the Government would take all possible steps to see that the court's orders are not violated and that no harm is done to the structure of the mosque. Construction, of course, will not take place. Today, even the General Secretary of the RSS, Shri Seshadri has said that there is going to be some washing and cleaning and some jhadoo-lagaing and some watering all round! That is the substitute for construction! Well, it is all right.
SHRI A. CHARLES: Is That work for tourists too?
SHRI INDRAJIT GUPTA: Whatever it is! Anyway, we all know that no temple can be contructed overnight. It has to beging with some jhadooing and pochaing and all that! But it should not go beyond that.
We have always said repeatedly that a temple should be built, a temple will be built and a temple must be built because that place has acquired a particular symbolism in the minds of millions of people in this country . But it must not be done at the expense of the places of religious worship of other communities. That is the main thing.
Otherwise, secularism has no meaning.
I also remind you Sir, of that architectural desingn or plan which was circulated sometime back. i don't know where it has gone.
The whole idea, according to this plan, is to cover the mosque, to build the temple in such a way that it would cover the mosque. The mosque will be inside and the temple will
609 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
[Sh. Indrajit Gupta]
cover it from all sides including the top. Then, what would remain of this mosque? I don't know whether the same plan still holds good. They must tell us. They must submit it to you at least! They kind of a subterfuge will not do. Everybody knows what is going on. I hope that this time at least, when we are over the hump, when the crisis is resolved- I am sure, it will be resolved- then we must put our heads together and think of measures which must be taken unitedly by all secular forces in this country to see that this kind of repeat performance is stopped for good, and the forces of secularism assert themselves and these people are not permitted every time to hold/the country to ransom on these false scores.
SHRI VISHWANATH PRATAP SINGH (Fatehpur): Mr Speaker, Sir, I think that after the speech of Shri Indrajeet Gupta, not much is left for discussion, perhaps, he has given vent to our emotions fully well. He has rightly asserted that the statement of the hon. Home Minister does not make his intentions clear. The aim and objective of Atal Ji is clear.... [Interruptions] Whatever has gone from there is objective and the aim has also been made clear. Therefore, we are worried about that. We should be thankful to Atal-ji since he has made it clear that it is none other than a political issue. Very honestly he has asserted that is should be settled by political ways. If it is not settlement they are there to settle it. Every thing has been said, now there is no dispute. They have raised the objection that talks were held separately with the sadhus. They know their problem and they can tell about it. something has been told and something has not been told. We would not like to know about the talks, which were held with the saints, but we would like to know were about the talks, which ere held with us in the N.I.C.
610 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
We were told that if the court order is violated, then it will be taken as a violation of the Constitution. The Government is not being run according to the Constitution. It was also said that every effort will be made to safeguard the Constitution. It is another thing that we had given many suggestions but no one was acceded to. Had the Hon.
Home Minister repeated it then we could have felt some sort of encouragement.
One of our suggestion was that as the matter is pending with the Supreme Court, the Government cannot deny its responsibility. It is not like that a case is between two persons and it is not the concern of the Central Government. A detailed discussion was held on it. It is mentioned in the manifesto of each party. It has been mentioned in your manifesto also. Even then you are not fulfilling your promise which has created doubts about your seriousness in the matter. I had clearly said in the N.I.C. to the Hon. Prime Minister to make the Central Government a party in the Supreme Court. When some responsibility is given to anyone he should carry out it positively.
We find the lack of that will in it. It aggrevates the doubts when the Central Government shirks from that. I had given a clear suggestion in the N.I.C. that the Central Government should make it clear in the court that it is ready to appoint the receiver and take the responsibility. What does the judges has except a pen and paper.
Ultimately the executive has to bear the burden. If the executive denies then nothing can be done. The judge sahib will go to his bunglow after declaring the judgement after that it is your responsibility, your actions are not believable and everyone has the same feeling. You give a clear answer, since ten days have passed, when the judiciary has given a decision and the executive is sitting idle. We people feel helplessness in the House in such circumstances.
During the past ten days our country has been trapped in such a circumstances that it is helpless and bewildered to find a solution to it. It is a
611 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
[Sh. Vishwanath Pratap Singh]
fatal position for the country. This sort of mentality can totally disintegrate the country from inside and the outward structure may remain integrated. A country can not be run by military and police only, a country is run by faith and trust. We are in a direction and if that is lost then neither the papers of the Constitution nor the building of the Supremem Court will be able to stop it. We hope from the Central Government that it will carry out its responsibility.
Today the country has given you a responsibility, show that faith and this feeling should not arise that Indian States do not exist.
You should try to asses the picture and the scenirio being treated today. You want that a positive discussion should be held. I will not go into the detail. Keeping this thing in mind I would like to say that everyone is feared as to how these 5-6 days will pass.
Today every eye is towards the Government. The pidiciary has said every thing. Today, we do not find confidence in you. You should do some thing develop it. We have given you strength.
It is true that once we were sitting on that side and you were on this side. This matter came up all of a sudden. You had thought it wise not to give support on 7th November. You could have managed the downfall of the Government on 8th November, but our concept was clear.
Today the issue is the same, the problem is the same, you are sitting there and we are sitting here. But we will follow our principles. We will follow our own way, whether we are sitting here or there. We are ready to give support on this issue while you were not ready to extend support at that time.
Just now I have heard the speech of hon. Arjun Singh ji Hon.
Arjun Singh ji has spoken the same things which are in our minds also but here also the question of
612 Disc. Under Rule 193 Situation at Ayodhya
credibility arises. I am not making a personal comment against him, but for party i will say if these feeling are going to be the fundamentals of the values of freedom and secularism, then what will happen to our nation. If the same concern, being expressed presently, has been expressed at the time of Shilanyas, then the situation would not have been so worse. Today people from every nook and corner would ask from us on what basis this Shilanyas was done. We are in between the two. Shilanyas is on the one side and the platform as on the other. Sir, when one goes hunting, people make an uproar from one side and the prey is driven to the side where the hunter is seated and in order to save its life the animal runs towards hunter. [Interruptions] Ours is a position that we suffer at both ends. So, kindly, leave hunting now, we are fully with you. Please adopt only one attitude. If Shilanyas has been performed and a platform contructed, let them remain there. Nobody is against Ram temple. Now the issue is of 70 acres of land, the temple of Lakshman is being constructed, they are constructing it. The story remains the same but the flair changes.