Libertè MUN 2018

BACKROUND GUIDE

Committee: All India Political Parties Meet

Agenda: The Ayodhya Issue

Greetings Delegates,

I am delighted that we have decided to convene a meeting on this burning

issue, which requires immediate solutions looking at the recent socio-
political developments in the country.
The disputed structure of the supposed Ram Janmbhoomi has been a matter
of religious contention since decades, but its usage by the political parties for
their convenience and electoral interest has transformed the issue into a more
serious one, requiring a multi-dimensional approach.
I request the delegates to look into possible solutions keeping in mind the
interests of various communities and stakeholders involved. The issue at
hand, despite being one of personal faith, needs to be dealt with utmost
caution, and therefore the stakeholders need to look for possible
reconciliatory measures, and work towards achieving a consensus.
I further request the delegates invited for the meet to come to forum not just
as representatives of their communities, interest groups, and political parties,
but first and foremost as Indians.
It is the responsibility of all of us to ensure that the decision and outcome of
the meeting does not affect the peace and security of the country, or any
community.

Looking forward to receiving constructive solutions from all the esteemed

stakeholders.

Jai Hind,

Mani Bhushan Jha

Moderator
Chirag Sinha
Deputy Moderator
The Timeline


*1528: Babur, Mughal Empire, builds a mosque in Ram

Janmabhoomi, Ayodhya. 
Some Hindus say Ram Janmabhoomi
is the birthplace of Lord Rama.

*1853: First recorded incidents of religious violence at the site. 


*1855: Hindus and Muslims clash over possession of the mosque.

There are claims that Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabootara were built
around this time 


*1859: British colonial administration erects a fence to separate the

places of worship, allowing the inner court to be used by Muslims
and the outer court by Hindus.

*1885: Mahant Raghubar Das files a suit seeking permission to

build a canopy on Ram Chabootra.

*1949: Idols of Lord Rama appear inside mosque allegedly placed

there by Hindus. Muslims protest and both parties file civil suits.
The government proclaims the premises a disputed area and locks
the gates.

*1950: Gopal Singh Visharad and Mahant Paramhand Ramchandra

Das file suits in Faizabad, asking for permission to offer prayers to
the idols installed at Asthan Janmabhoomi. Inner courtyard gates
are locked, but puja is allowed.

*1959: Nirmohi Akhara and Mahant Raghunath file a case,

claiming to be the sect responsible for conducting puja.

*1961: Sunni Central Board of Waqfs, UP, files a case claiming

the mosque and the surrounding land was a graveyard.

*1984: Hindus form a committee to "liberate" the birth-place of

Lord Rama and build a temple in his honor, spearheaded by the
Vishwa Hindu Parishad party (VHP). Then Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP) leader Lal Krishna Advani takes over leadership of
campaign.

*1986: On a petition of Hari Shanker Dubey, a judge directs

masjid gates be unlocked to allow darshan. District judge orders
the gates of the disputed mosque opened to allow Hindus to
worship there. Muslims set up Babri Mosque Action Committee in
protest.

*1989: VHP steps up campaign, laying the foundations of a Rama

temple on land adjacent to the disputed mosque. Former VHP vice-
president Justice Deoki Nandan Agarwal files a case, seeking the
mosque be shifted elsewhere.

*1990: VHP volunteers partially damage the mosque. Prime

Minister Chandra Shekhar tries to resolve the dispute through
negotiations, which fail the next year.

*1991: BJP comes to power in Uttar Pradesh state, where Ayodhya

is located.

*1992: The mosque is torn down by supporters of the VHP, the

Shiv Sena party and the BJP, prompting nationwide rioting
between Hindus and Muslims in which more than 2,000 people
die.

*1998: The BJP forms coalition government under Prime Minister

Atal Behari Vajpayee.

*2001: Tensions rise on the anniversary of the demolition of the

mosque. VHP pledges again to build Hindu temple at the site.

*2002: The High Court directs the Archaeological Survey of India

to excavate the site to determine if a temple lay underneath.

*Jan 2002: Mr Vajpayee sets up an Ayodhya cell in his office and

appoints a senior official, Shatrughna Singh, to hold talks with
Hindu and Muslim leaders.

*Feb 2002: BJP rules out committing itself to the construction of a

temple in its election manifesto for Uttar Pradesh assembly
elections. VHP confirms deadline of 15 March to begin
construction. Hundreds of volunteers converge on site. At least 58
people are killed in an attack on a train in Godhra, which is
carrying Hindu activists returning from Ayodhya.

*Mar 2002: Between 1,000 and 2,000 people, mostly Muslims, die
in riots in Gujarat following the train attack.

*Apr 2002: Three High Court judges begin hearings on

determining who owns the religious site.

*Jan 2003: Archaeologists begin a court-ordered survey to find out

whether a temple to Lord Rama existed on the site.

*Aug 2003: The survey says there is evidence of a temple beneath

the mosque, but Muslims dispute the findings. Mr Vajpayee says at
the funeral of Hindu activist Ramchandra Das Paramhans that he
will fulfill the dying man's wishes and build a temple at Ayodhya.
However, he hopes the courts and negotiations will solve the issue.

*Sept 2003: A court rules that seven Hindu leaders should stand
trial for inciting the destruction of the Babri Mosque, but no
charges are brought against Mr. Advani, now deputy prime
minister, who was also at the site in 1992.

*Oct 2004: Mr. Advani says his party still has "unwavering"
commitment to building a temple at Ayodhya, which he said was
"inevitable".

*Nov 2004: A court in Uttar Pradesh rules that an earlier order

which exonerated Mr. Advani for his role in the destruction of the
mosque should be reviewed.

*July 2005: Suspected Islamic militants attack the disputed site,

using a jeep laden with explosives to blow a hole in the wall of the
complex. Security forces kill five people they say are militants, and
a sixth who was not immediately identified.

*June 2009: The Liberhan commission investigating events

leading up to the mosque's demolition submits its report - 17 years
after it began its inquiry. Its contents are not made public.

*July 2010: On July 27, the court took the initiative for an
amicable solution to the dispute when it called on counsel for the
contending parties to go into the possibility. But no headway was
made.

*September 2010: The Special Bench, at its Bench of Judicature

here, comprising Justices S.U. Khan, D.V. Sharma and Sudhir
Agarwal, said that Mr. Tripathi's application lacked merit. It also
imposed “exemplary costs” of Rs. 50,000, terming his effort for an
out-of-court settlement as a “mischievous attempt.”

*24th September 2010: The judgment on the 60-year-old title suit

was pronounced at 3.30 p.m. The court reserved its judgment on
July 26.

*27 Jan 2013: Allahabad High Court ruled by majority that the
disputed land in Ayodhya be divided into three parts to be
distributed among the Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and the
party for 'Ram Lalla Virajman '.
*UP elections 2017: BJP comes to power under the leadership of
Yogi Adityanath.

*May 2017: Senior BJP members, including members of

Margadarshak Mandal (LK Advani and MM Joshi), and a sitting
union minister (Uma Bharti) charged under criminal conspiracy
case for allegedly inciting mobs to topple the Babri Masjid. All
deny charges.

The Story of Ram Rath Yatra

In September 1990, BJP leader L. K. Advani began a "rathyatra" to

Ayodhya in order to generate support for the movement. Advani
later stated in his memoirs, "If Muslims are entitled to an Islamic
atmosphere in Mecca, and if Christians are entitled to a Christian
atmosphere in the Vatican, why is it wrong for the Hindus to
expect a Hindu atmosphere in Ayodhya?" The yatra resulted in
communal riots in many cities it passed through, prompting the
government of Bihar to arrest Advani. In spite of this, a large
number of 'karsevaks' or Sangh Parivar activists reached Ayodhya
and tried to attack the mosque. They were stopped by the police
and the paramilitary forces, resulting in a pitched battle in which
several karsevaks were killed. Accusing the central government of
V.P Singh of being weak, the BJP withdrew its support,
necessitating fresh elections. In these elections, the BJP won a
majority in the Uttar Pradesh assembly, and also increased its share
in the Lok Sabha.
Demolition of Babri Masjid

On 6 December 1992, the VHP and its associates, including the

BJP, organised a rally involving around 150,000 VHP and BJP
karsevaks at the site of the mosque. The ceremonies included
speeches by BJP leaders such as Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and
Uma Bharti. The mob grew restive through the duration of the
speeches, and stormed the mosque shortly in afternoon. A police
cordon placed there to protect the mosque was heavily
outnumbered. The mosque was attacked with a number of
improvised tools, and brought to the ground in a few hours. This
occurred despite a commitment from the state government to the
Indian Supreme Court that the mosque would not be harmed. More
than 2000 people were killed in the riots following the demolition.
Riots broke out in many major Indian cities including Mumbai,
Delhi and Hyderabad.

The Liberhan Ayodhya Commission of Inquiry and

Memorandum of Action taken by the Government on Report.

On 16 December 1992, the Liberhan Commission was set up by the

Government of India to probe the circumstances that led to the
demolition of the Babri Mosque. It was the longest running
commission in India's history with several extensions granted by
various governments. The report found a number of people to be
culpable in the demolition, including BJP leaders like Atal Bihari
Vajpayee, Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, the then Uttar
Pradesh Chief Minister Kalyan Singh, Pramod Mahajan, Uma
Bharti and Vijayraje Scindia, as well as VHP leaders like Giriraj
Kishore and Ashok Singhal. Other prominent political leaders
indicted by the commission include late Shiv Sena chief Bal
Thackeray and former RSS leader K Govindacharya. Relying on the
testimonies of several eyewitnesses, the report stated that many of
these leaders had made provocative speeches at the rally that
provoked the demolition. It also stated that they could have stopped
the demolition if they had wished so.

Many Muslim organisations have continued to express outrage at

the destruction of the disputed structure. In July 2005, terrorists
attacked the makeshift temple at the site of the destroyed mosque.
In 2007, M. N. Gopal Das, then head of the Ram temple, received
phone calls getting threats against his life. Many terror attacks by
banned jihadi outfits like IM cited demolition of Babri Mosque as
an excuse for terrorist attacks. The legal case continues regarding
the title deed of the land tract which is a government controlled
property.

Archaeological and Scientific Evidence of the Supposed

Ramjanmabhoomi
Archaeological excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India
(ASI) in 1970, 1992 and 2003 in and around the disputed site have
clearly found the evidence indicating that a large Hindu complex
existed on the site. In 2003, by the order of an Indian Court, The
Archaeological Survey of India was asked to conduct a more in
depth study and an excavation to ascertain the type of structure that
was beneath the rubble indicated definite proof of a temple under
the mosque. However, it could not be ascertained if it was a Rama
temple as remnant had more resemblance to a Shiva temple. In the
words of ASI researchers, they discovered "distinctive features
associated with... temples of north India".
Findings of ASI report
According to the digging carried out by ASI in 1970 and 2003,
there is 'archeological evidence of a massive structure' below
ground where the Babri mosque was destroyed in 1992. The
structure bears distinctive features associated with ancient temples
of northern India. There is evidence of building work there from as
far as the 10th century. The excavated area covered beneath the
disputed land at least 14,000 sq.ft over which the report said,
'There is sufficient proof of existence of a massive and
monumental structure having a minimum dimension of 50x30
meters in the north-south and east-west directions, respectively,
just below the disputed structure.' The report said that excavation
clearly showed distinctive features of a tenth century temple below
the ruins of the Babri Mosque. It further mentions discovery of 50
pillar bases, decorated bricks bearing features of 10th century,
deities of Hindu gods and goddesses, lotus motifs, and curved
architectural pieces. The report, on the basis of these archeological
findings came to the conclusion of existence of a Hindu temple at
the site of dispute. The pillar bases exposed in the northern and
southern gave some idea of the length of the massive wall of the
earlier construction with which they were associated and might
have been originally 60 m. Toward the east of the central point, a
circular depression was noted signifying some important object
was placed there. In the report it is stated that the main chamber of
the disputed structure falls just over the central point of the length
of the massive wall of the preceding period which could not be
excavated because of the presence of the idol of the infant Rama in
the makeshift structure. The salient and significant conclusion of
the excavation seem to be that area below the disputed site
remained a place for public use till the Mughal period when the
disputed structure was built (Babri Mosque) which was confined to
a limited area and the population settled around it as evidenced by
the increase in contemporary archeological materials. This
conclusion, the report said, is further attested by the conspicuous
absence of habitational structure such as house complexes, soakage
pits, and jars, ring wells, drains, hearths, kilns or furnaces.

The Differing Viewpoints

In his Communal History and Rama's Ayodhya, written prior to the
ASI researches, Professor Ram Sharan Sharma writes, "Ayodhya
seems to have emerged as a place of religious pilgrimage in
medieval times. Although chapter 85 of the Vishnu Smriti lists as
many as fifty-two places of pilgrimage, including towns, lakes,
rivers, mountains, etc., it does not include Ayodhya in this list.
Sharma also notes that Tulsidas, who wrote the Ramcharitmanas in
1574 at Ayodhya, does not mention it as a place of pilgrimage.
This suggests that there was no significant Hindu temple at the site
of the Babri Mosque., or that it had ceased to be one, after the
mosque was built. After the demolition of the mosque in 1992,
Professor Ram Sharan Sharma along with historians SurajBhan, M.
Athar Ali and Dwijendra Narayan Jha wrote the Historian's report
to the nation saying that the assumption that there was a temple at
the disputed site was mistaken, and that there was no valid reason
to destroy the mosque.

Nirmohi Akhara
A group of Hindu ascetics who are devotees of none other than
Lord Ram. Their name means, roughly, “Group without
Attachment.” They have given up the material world for the
company of their god. They are “sadhus” – or Hindu holy men
often characterized by the hermetic tendencies. They claimed in
court that there is no mosque called Babri Masjid at the site in
Ayodhya, nor did the Mughal commander Babur make any
conquest or any occupation of territory in India. They also claimed
the site is of ancient antiquity and has existed before the living
memory of man. Lord Ram and his court representatives receive
another third of the site.

Ram Janmabhoomi
Literally, this phrase means “the land Ram was born on.” Hindu
groups refer to the property in Ayodhya where the medieval Babri
mosque stood and that was at the heart of the 60 year dispute with
this phrase. Ram is one of the most revered incarnations of one of
the deities of a Hindu trinity—the god of preservation, Vishnu.

Sunni Waqf Board

This is an elected legal body that oversees Sunni Islamic properties
endowed for religious or charitable purposes. The plaintiff in the
case that was decided Thursday was the Uttar Pradesh Sunni
Central Board of Waqfs, which supervises these properties in the
state where the town of Ayodhya is located. The board gets the
third portion of the site.

Ram Lala Virajman

This refers to Hindu idols placed in the central dome of the
mosque, allegedly in 1949. The phrase specifically refers to Ram
as a baby or a young child. Parts of the Hindu suits revolved
around seeking access to these idols and having them remain there,
while the Muslim plaintiffs wanted them removed.

Questions in front of the court

x Is the construction of a mosque in dispute built on the site of
a temple after demolishing the temple?

x Was it a part of the property used for worship by Hindus

immediately before the construction of the mosque in 1528? Was
the property site of Lord Ram Supporters?

x Does Hindus worship the shrine which is challenged is Shree

Ram JanmaBhumi and treat it as a place of pilgrimage since time
immemorial?

x Were the Muslim community having the possession of the

property until 1949? Do Muslims offer prayers at the shrine since
time immemorial?

x Were the idols of Lord Ram placed inside the building

involved in the night of 22 and 23 December 1949 or was present
there before?

On 30th September 2010, Allahabad High Court ruled that the

disputed site, with an area of 2,400 square feet (220 m2), on which
the Babri Masjid had stood prior to its demolition on 6 December
1992, should be divided into three parts. The ruling stated that the
third of the site on which the idol of Rama was placed would be
granted to the party stating that it represented Rama. Another third
of the site would be granted to the Sunni Wakf Board, and the
remaining third to the Hindu sect Nirmohi Akhara.
Stay on the Judgment

The verdict was appealed in the Supreme Court of India. In an

order dated 27 Jan 2013, the court stated that the status quo should
be maintained at the disputed site, while the appeals were dealt
with. The Supreme Court stayed the Allahabad High Court verdict
that directed division of 2.77 acres of land of the disputed Ram
Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya into three parts among
Hindus, Muslims and the Nirmohi Akhara. A Bench of Justices
Aftab Alam and R.M. Lodha, admitting a batch of appeals from
both Hindu and Muslim organisations, stayed the September 30,
2010 judgment of the Lucknow Bench of the High Court and
directed the parties to maintain the status quo at the site. Those
who filed the appeals included the Sunni Central Wakf Board,
U.P.; the Nirmohi Akhara; the All-India Hindu Mahasabha and
Bhagwan Shri Ram Virajman.

30th May,2017

After a special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court

rejected discharge application of veterans Lal Krishna Advani,
Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, framing charges against them
and the other nine accused in the Babri Masjid demolition case, the
Communist Party of India (Marxist) said justice should be
delivered as soon as possible.

"The Supreme Court clearly said that it was a monumental crime.

And therefore, reinstated the charges which had been dismissed by
the all these courts. Now, if the CBI court is going to again take a
lenient view of the crime which was committed of hate speeches
which were made allowing people to go out on bail and on a
personal bond. These are going to be under the scrutiny. Therefore,
the Supreme Court will have to take suo motto notice if there is
any further leniency shown to these people," CPI (M) leader
Brinda Karat said.

"These are the same charges framed by the designated court soon
after the Babri Masjid demolition. The BJP was in the government,
Advani was deputy Prime Minister and the Home Minister these
charges were dropped. Now, the the same charges were revived.
There is now the requirement for hearing as soon as possible
without wasting the time. We demand justice from the Court
without any further delay," CPI (M) leader Sitaram Yechury told
ANI.

Resources for further research:

Liberhan Commission Report
Building The Sri Rama Temple in Ayodhya by Subramanian
Swamy
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/ayodhya/ch4.htm