The verdict is out: The Ayodhya land is indeed the janmabhoomi of Lord Ram. The Court affirmed this, in light of the report submitted by the Archealogical Survey of India (ASI) which stated that the mosque was indeed built on a "massive Hindu structure" originally built in the tenth century.
The report's credibility is not questioned.
Also, the court has agreed to the fact that the Hindu idols were "forcibly" placed within the mosque in 1992.
The Sunni Waqf Board (Muslim Party) is definitely going to appeal against this order in the Supreme Court. The Hindu Parties are going to appeal too. They are saying, if the Court has already accepted the fact that Lord Ram was indeed born here, then why give the 1/3 rd area to the Muslims?
Experts are wondering if the Court is actually saying that it was alright for the radical Hindus to demolish the mosque structure way back in 1992?
Also, the court affirmed the legal rights of a diety. Thus a "Lord" (equivalent to god in India!!!) could still fight a case, since he/ she enjoys legal rights. And so even this case was fought by a diety, Rama Lala. But since he is treated as a god, isn't he supposed to be mitigate issues of others?
The leading newspaper of the nation, carried the headline, "2:1- Hindus: Muslims". I wonder if this is a sensitive headline in times like these. The case was all about the test of India's secularism and tolerance in time, rather than a property suit.
People are ready to move on; only if our politicians decided to do the same, the case will be closed.
No comments:
Post a Comment