The BJP on Monday said the demolition of the disputed structure at
Ayodhya was a result of public anger and asserted that it would
build a Ram temple at the same site for "national justice", as it
slammed the Liberhan Commission report as "a political document"
which is "biased".
Opening BJP's defence on the report which has indicted a number of
its leaders, party chief Rajnath Singh said in the Lok Sabha that
the Liberhan Commission report was "a bundle of grave errors" and
its intent appeared to be "pre-decided" and aimed at "character
assassination" of certain political leaders and parties.
Commission has reached "bizarre" conclusions, he said during the
debate and took strong objection to the adverse comments made
against former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and senior
leaders L K Advani and M M Joshi.
said the report was "not unbiased" and said it was a "political
document of character assassinations" as legal criteria for
indictment had been ignored.
"Whatever happened on December 6, 1992, was a result of public
anger. There was no mosque at the site since 1936," he said, amid
repeated disruptions caused by objections from Congress and some
other parties like Samajwadi Party.
Liberhan Commission report is a bundle of several errors....even
after spending 17 years it has not been able to bring out the
truth," he said.
During the 17 years, Justice Liberhan or anybody else from the
Commission had not visited Ayodhya even once, Singh said and likened
him to Sanjay, an aide of Mahabharat's Dhrithrastra, who had a
special vision and could give a blow-by-blow account of the
Kurukshetra war without being there. "Who is that Dhrithrastra," he
Singh said the indictment of Vajpayee and other BJP leaders was not
based on facts but assumptions and the commission seemed to be
"pre-decided" on whom to blame for the demolition and has thus
reached "bizarre" conclusions.
Hitting out at the Commission for describing Vajpayee as "psuedo-secular",
he said even Nehru had praised the BJP leader and Rao used to see
him as a political guru.
report is totally baseless, prejudiced and is a deliberate attempt
to target some persons and political parties," he charged.
"Building a Ram temple is not just religious justice, but also
national justice. BJP reaffirms its commitment to build Ram Temple
at the same site. When BJP, which was part of NDA, was in power, it
could not deliver on its promise despite trying its best," the BJP
insisted that no 'namaz' had been performed at the disputed
structure since 1934 and the doors of the structure were opened for
for 'puja' of the Ram Lala in 1949.
Hitting back at the Congress, he said then Prime Minister Rajiv
Gandhi had gone to have 'darshan' of Devraha Baba on November 6,
1989, before elections and had a meeting for 40 minutes. "The
government should state what did they talk for 40 minutes," he said.
Singh spoke about the events preceding December 6, 1992, Home
Minister P Chidambaram intervened saying the issue of 'namaz' or 'puja'
being conducted at the disputed structure in Ayodhya could not be
discussed in Parliament as the matter was sub-judice.
"Whether namaz or puja was being conducted is part of the title
suit. We are not here to debate a title suit. It is sub-judice and
cannot be debated in this House," he said, adding that the debate
should confine to the Liberhan report.
Chidambaram, who is expected to reply to the debate on Tuesday, said
the Liberhan Commission was appointed only to "go into the
circumstances leading to the demolition" so as to find out who
demolished the structure.
Agreeing with Chidambaram, Speaker Meria Kumar said the members
should be conscious of the fact that the matter is sub-judice and
their statements should not prejudice the title suit. She asked the
members to confine to the report.
this, Murli Manohar Joshi (BJP) said the point was raised by the
party to highlight inaccuracies. But Singh contended that as the
matter was in courts, there was no point debating the report at all.
Defending the then Kalyan Singh government in UP, Singh said the
Congress had in 1945 given a strong commitment not to allow
country's partition but failed to keep the promise.
questions are now being raised about Kalyan Singh's assurance to the
Supreme Court on not allowing any damage to the disputed structure,"