NEW DELHI — The case has existed almost as long as independent India itself. Dating from 1950, the legal battle between Hindus and Muslims over a religious site in the city of Ayodhya began as a little-noticed title dispute. With a ruling finally expected on Thursday, the case has become something altogether different: a test of India’s secular soul.
The test is not so much in the verdict, which will deal with a handful of issues, including the central question of which side controls the site of a 16th-century mosque known as the Babri Masjid. Rather, the test will come in the public reaction. In 1992, an enraged mob of Hindu extremists destroyed the mosque, asserting that the site was the birthplace of the Hindu deity, Ram. Riots erupted, claiming about 2,000 lives, mostly Muslims, and horrifying a nation founded on the ideal of religious tolerance.
For the past month, the Indian government and leaders of major political parties, including right-wing Hindu leaders who stoked the 1992 violence, have asked people to remain calm and refrain from violence. Thousands of security officers have been deployed to Ayodhya, though the authorities concede that riots could occur anywhere. The verdict is considered so politically combustible that an emergency appeal to delay the verdict until after the Commonwealth Games in October was sent to India’s Supreme Court last week — and rejected on Tuesday.
Later on Tuesday, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called on the nation to “maintain peace, harmony and tranquillity.” Perhaps the only person eager for the verdict is Hashim Ansari, a Muslim tailor in Ayodhya who is the case’s oldest surviving plaintiff. He is 90 and tired of waiting. Mr. Ansari, who joined the case as a plaintiff in 1961, said in a telephone interview that he did not want any tumult or violence, just closure.
“It has taken on a political color,” Mr. Ansari said of the case. “We are just waiting for a verdict. Whatever judgment comes, all of us Muslims will agree, whether it is in our favor or not.”
The test is not so much in the verdict, which will deal with a handful of issues, including the central question of which side controls the site of a 16th-century mosque known as the Babri Masjid. Rather, the test will come in the public reaction. In 1992, an enraged mob of Hindu extremists destroyed the mosque, asserting that the site was the birthplace of the Hindu deity, Ram. Riots erupted, claiming about 2,000 lives, mostly Muslims, and horrifying a nation founded on the ideal of religious tolerance.
For the past month, the Indian government and leaders of major political parties, including right-wing Hindu leaders who stoked the 1992 violence, have asked people to remain calm and refrain from violence. Thousands of security officers have been deployed to Ayodhya, though the authorities concede that riots could occur anywhere. The verdict is considered so politically combustible that an emergency appeal to delay the verdict until after the Commonwealth Games in October was sent to India’s Supreme Court last week — and rejected on Tuesday.
Later on Tuesday, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called on the nation to “maintain peace, harmony and tranquillity.” Perhaps the only person eager for the verdict is Hashim Ansari, a Muslim tailor in Ayodhya who is the case’s oldest surviving plaintiff. He is 90 and tired of waiting. Mr. Ansari, who joined the case as a plaintiff in 1961, said in a telephone interview that he did not want any tumult or violence, just closure.
“It has taken on a political color,” Mr. Ansari said of the case. “We are just waiting for a verdict. Whatever judgment comes, all of us Muslims will agree, whether it is in our favor or not.”
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق