Saturday, December 12, 2009

The speech they did not want the World to hear

The BJP MPs tried their best to drown out the speech given by Union Home Minsiter P.Chidambaram on December 8 in Indian Parliament [Lok Sabha] in reply to the debate on Liberhan Commission report on demolition of Babri Masjid.They continuosly shouted loud slogans,  instead of usual practise of walking out in protest.

Here are  some excerpts from  the speech which was described by 'The Hindu' as
"a cool lawyerly marshalling of facts punctuated by sharp punches but also by honest self-criticism that is rare in Indian political discourse."

THE MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS (SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM):
Mr. Chairperson, Sir, the Liberhan Commission of Inquiry was constituted in December, 1992… (Interruptions). The Commission was appointed to go into the circumstances leading to the destruction of Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid structure… (Interruptions). The Commission has taken 17 years to give its report… (Interruptions) 1738 hours (Madam Speaker in the Chair) I am not here to defend why the Commission was allowed to take 17 years… (Interruptions). The then Congress Government … (Interruptions). The NDA Government assumed office thereafter… (Interruptions). The NDA Government was there for six years and it also gave extensions.… (Interruptions) The UPA Government gave the remaining extensions for about nine years and three months... (Interruptions). In a sense everyone is responsible for the extensions given to Justice Liberhan Commission.

When I took over, the Commission was given extension up to 31st March, 2009… (Interruptions). I gave extension to the Commission for two months and I insisted that the Report should be given to the Government of India within two months… (Interruptions). The Commission gave its report on 20th of June, 2009… (Interruptions). The Government of the day had told the Commission that the report is long overdue and it should have been given much earlier… (Interruptions) Be that as it may, we now have a report. The report gives in great detail the sequence of events… (Interruptions)



The Report gives the minutest details of what happened on each day leading to 6th December, 1992… (Interruptions) talked about the horrendous events that took place on the 6th of December, 1992. This Report … (Interruptions) those who are found to be responsible for the destruction … (Interruptions) the source of … (Interruptions) But unfortunately it is not so.
 
This is one of the rare occasions when I rise to reply to a debate with sadness in my heart… (Interruptions) The way this debate has unwinded itself is a … (Interruptions) on the Parliament of India. Someone must take the responsibility … (Interruptions) The only issue before the House is not whether there was a temple there; not whether there was a mosque there; not whether a mosque was built over a temple; not whether a Hindu community owned a piece of land there; not whether a Muslim community owned a piece of land there; not whether any injustice has been done to any one community. The only issue before the House is, who has demolished the mosque? … 
 
 Pending cases in the courts, the demolition as … (Interruptions) is the Sangh Parivar, the RSS an organization which is held responsible for the black day in the history of India… (Interruptions) The Commission is aware of this.
 
The Commission says, “I was called upon to enquire into the sequence of events and the circumstances relating to the occurrence in the Ramjanma Bhoomi Babri Masjid complex on the 6th of December, 1992 involving the destruction of the Ramjanmabhoomi Babri Masjid structure”… (Interruptions) The Commission says, as evident from the Terms of Reference given to me, I have not been called upon, and therefore do not wish to comment upon whether the structures as they existed in Ayodhya on the 6th of December 1992 constituted a Hindu temple or a Muslim mosque or any other type of structure… (Interruptions) I have been charged with the responsibility only to find out the sequence of events, facts and circumstances leading up to the demolition of the structures at Ayodhya and certain connected matters that took place. It is not within my purview to enquire into a dispute whether it was ever a temple or a mosque built over a temple.”



Sir, in the days leading to 6th December, 1992, the Government of India issued directives to two players… (Interruptions) One was the Government of Uttar Pradesh headed by Shri Kalyan Singh and the other constitutional authority was the Home Minister of Government of India under the late P V Narasimha Rao and … (Interruptions) these were the two constitutional authorities. How was one more responsible… (Interruptions) How did one communicate to the other?… (Interruptions)



Shri S.B. Chavan wrote three letters to Shri Kalyan Singh. The first letter was on 3rd December, 1992 in which he said:
“Forces are being stationed at suitable locations in Uttar Pradesh so as to be available at a short notice if and when required by the State Government.” No one can accuse the Congress Government of that day that adequate forces were not deployed.… (Interruptions)
On the same day, Shri S.B. Chavan wrote another letter to Shri Kalyan Singh on 3rd December, 1992 in which he said: “It is understood that by 4th /5th December, 1992, the number of Karsevaks at Ayodhya would have crossed one lakh. However, it appears that infrastructural arrangements made for the Kar Sewaks are becoming increasingly stretched and insufficient for the assembled Karsevaks.” … (Interruptions)

On 5th December, 1992, Shri S.B. Chavan wrote a letter in which he used a rather stern language. “In your last letter dated 2nd December, 1992, you once again reiterated the State Government‟s commitment to protect the structure.”

Shri Kalyan Singh, in his letter of 2nd December reiterated the State Government‟s commitment to protect the structure. … (Interruptions) Drawing his attention to his promise, the Home Minister said: “There are reports that the Karsevaks are in a restive and even in belligerent mood and that many of them are resorting to extensive purchases of Trishuls which can even be used for offensive purposes. The security arrangements made by the State Governmetn may not be adequate for the occasion especially if any violence breaks out. …(Interruptions) Further, it is reported that massive crowds are gathering freely and unchecked in that the Sankeertan area. … (Interruptions) It is necessary to upgrade security arrangements substantially to prevent the possibility of any attempt being made to damage the disputed structure..… (Interruptions) Shri S.B. Chavan said that the possibility of some mischievous elements using explosives to damage the RJBBM structure cannot be ruled out. … (Interruptions) As you are aware, contingents of the central paramilitary forces have already been stationed at various places in UP so as to make them available at short notice; if required by the State Government for the security of the disputed structure and maintenance of law and order in view of the call given for the Kar Seva.… (Interruptions) I understand that only about 23 companies including four companies of CRPF are currently deployed for the security arrangements in and around the RJBBM complex. It is felt that this strength may not be sufficient to meet the security arrangements especially if any untoward development takes place… (Interruptions)

 Madam, it is absolutely clear that the Chief Minister had made a solemn promise that it is the State Government‟s responsibility to protect the structure. 185 companies of paramilitary forces had been placed and they had been placed at crucial locations but they deployed only four companies in order to protect the RJBBM structure. … (Interruptions)

It was the first big untruth uttered by the then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. It was an unadulterated untruth. He had no intention to protect the Babri Masjid structure. … (Interruptions) He uttered untruth to the Government of India. He uttered untruth to the Supreme Court. He uttered untruth to the National Integration Council. He uttered untruth on affidavit and that was the genesis of the destruction of the Babri Masjid complex.… (Interruptions) There was another occasion when he made a promise before the National Integration Council on 2nd November, 1991… (Interruptions)

I have got what he had said.



He said: All efforts will be made to find an amicable resolution of the issue; Pending a final solution, the Government of Uttar Pradesh will hold itself fully responsible for the protection of the Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid structure; Order of the Court in regard to the land acquisition proceedings will be fully implemented; and the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the cases pending before it will not be violated. … (Interruptions)

Then, a promise was made to the National Integration Council, a Council in which all the leaders of all the political parties were present; civil society is represented; and leaders of the political parties in Parliament were present. … (Interruptions) He made a solemn promise which was endorsed by the BJP and all other parties that were present. … (Interruptions)

This promise was made in the Supreme Court of India. … (Interruptions) I have got a copy of the order passed by the Supreme Court on 15th November, 1991. … (Interruptions) An affidavit was filed and the Supreme Court then passed an order. I think this order makes a very interesting reading. … (Interruptions) Anyone who is interested in the history of this country of that period would read this order. … (Interruptions)

This order says: “We have heard Mr. Jaitley”. I hope you know who Mr. Jaitley is. Mr. Jaitley was not only a Counsel. Mr. Jaitley is today the Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha. The order says: “We have heard Mr. Jaitley, the learned counsel of the respondent State. … (Interruptions) On the instructions of an officer present in the court, it has been gathered and told to us … (Interruptions) It is not denied that there are some old constructions in-between the main construction and the outer wall … (Interruptions) It can certainly be done as permitted by the High Court, but full care and attention should be devoted to ensure that the constructions, including the outer wall, which are old in character … (Interruptions) part of the disputed structure may not be … (Interruptions) This must be the total responsibility of the State of Uttar Pradesh to ensure compliance. … (Interruptions)

There was a meeting of the National Integration Council and the Chief Minister of the State … (Interruptions) He made certain statements to the Council. These were extracted from the paragraph of the affidavit … (Interruptions)
Then the Supreme Court says: … (Interruptions) Mr. Jaitley has no objection … (Interruptions) What has been stated in this paragraph. … after taking into account the stand of State of Uttar Pradesh ….. It may, therefore, be taken as a representation to the court on which ….

Madam, a promise was made to the National Integration Council; a promise was made to the Supreme Court; and a promise was made to the Government of India. But every single promise was broken by the leader of the BJP, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, and the black day occurred in the history of India. … (Interruptions)

Now, why does the Commission have to go into who the Sangh Parivar is? We know who the Sangh Parivar is. … (Interruptions) It was led to believe that the RSS is a non-political organization; that the BJP is an independent organization; that the VHP is purely a religious organization; and that the Bajrang Dal is an organization of young people.… (Interruptions)  These are the canards which are spread everyday. Everyday people spread the canards. The Commission went into the matter and asked, `who are these people, how did they get-together, how did they work together? So, this is the conclusion. I am quoting from paragraph 120.9 “There cannot be any dispute that the RSS is the major single largest important constituent of the Sangh Parivar. It is also accepted that the Bajrang Dal is the youth wing of VHP and Dharam Sansad and the Kendriya Marg Darshak Mandal sponsored by VHP though were portrayed as independent bodies. Similarly, Paramhans Ramchander Dass and Mulayam Singh Yadav accepted that all the members of the Sangh Parivar contested elections on the BJP tickets and become legislators of BJP party.”



… (Interruptions) I know the conclusion. … (Interruptions) It is obvious that promises held out by the BJP were completely false and made with the sole intention of misleading the Central Government and the entire country. …


(Interruptions) Let the House know that the promises held out by the BJP were completely false and made with the sole intention of misleading the Central Government and the entire country. … (Interruptions) The promises were made to secure the inaction of the Central Government and to induce it into a state of over optimistic slumber. The only other explanation possible is that the BJP itself was ineffective and inconsequential part of the larger picture. … (Interruptions) It neither has the means nor the authority nor even the influence within the Sangh Parivar to alter the course ordained. … (Interruptions) If accepted, this would further strengthen the impression that the BJP was a frontal organization and the convenient false face projected to address the more moderate sections within society and the Government. … (Interruptions) This is about your Party. … (Interruptions) I have not completed my speech yet. … (Interruptions) Some more things are coming. … (Interruptions) Madam, what is the situation? What position lies with the Supreme Court, lies with the Central Government than to create a situation in which, unfortunately, the Government of the day made a strong political judgment? Looking back I could say that it is a non-political judgment. Late Shri P. V. Narasimha Rao paid price for making that judgment and the Congress Party paid a price for that political judgment. But the fact is that non-political judgment induced by ……and false promises were made by the BJP. … (Interruptions) Now, what were the organizations that were there were doing? … (Interruptions)
 
 I quote from paragraph 41.68: “Intelligence agencies reported that the Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena were vying with each other for the “fame” of blowing up the disputed structure and this fact was within the knowledge of the VHP. The Shiv Sainiks and VHP cadres were practicing archery under the tutelage of Krishna Kumar Pandey. The Shiv Sena cadres swore on oath at Saryu River to demolish the disputed structure in the presence of local leaders and Vinay Katiyar etc.”
  : Is it not a fact that the Bajrang Dal cadres, the VHP cadres were practising archery, doing rehearsals to demolish the disputed structure in the presence of the local leaders?… (Interruptions) Intelligence agencies reported that the Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena were vying with each other for the “fame” of blowing up the disputed structure and this fact was within the knowledge of the VHP. … (Interruptions) The Shiv Sainiks and the VHP cadres were practicing archery under the tutelage of Krishna Kumar Pandey.… (Interruptions) The Shiv Sena cadres swore an oath at Saryu river to demolish the disputed structure in the presence of local leaders and Vijay Katiyar, etc..… (Interruptions) Can you deny that they were practising archery?… (Interruptions) Can you deny the VHP cadres were practicing archery under the tutelage of Krishna Kumar Pandey?… (Interruptions) The Governor of Uttar Pradesh sent his assessment about the prevailing situation in Ayodhya.… (Interruptions) He sent the report saying that the prevailing situation was pregnant with threat to the disputed structure. However, the Governor is right that he advised against the imposition of President‟s Rule. … Slogans were raised against the Muslim population. (Interruptions) A small selection of the slogans which became extremely popular and were regularly heard during the campaign at Ayodhya during Karseva, especially in December were these. … (Interruptions) Slogans were raised against the Muslim population. … (Interruptions) Please listen to the slogans. What were the slogans used? These were the slogans used… (Interruptions) I want to quote the slogans. These slogans were raised. … (I nterruptions) These were the slogans raised which slogans you are raising now. … (Interruptions)
 
Are you a responsible political party? Will these slogans do justice to the Founding Fathers of India? Do these slogans raise India‟s esteem?… (Interruptions) The Chief Minister Shri Kalyan Singh, once again and in writing ordered against use of any firearms specifically on the 6th of December, 1992.… (Interruptions) This is the conclusion in the Report. The Liberhan Commission concludes thus: “The Commission is of the considered opinion that the security apparatus was non-existent in Ayodhya on the 6th of December, 1992. The police and other personnel deployed had been bound down into an ineffective role and had specific instructions against any substantive action. They were to ensure that the Government achieved its electoral manifesto. The State administration was there to appease the political executive by helping it in consolidating their hold on the general public.” This was what happened.… (Interruptions)


I would now come to the role of the BJP leaders. I have great respect for Shri Vajpayee.… (Interruptions) He was not there on that day.… (Interruptions) He was there on the previous day.… (Interruptions) He made a speech on the 5th December.… (Interruptions) I have got a copy of that speech.… (Interruptions) I have an English translation of it.… (Interruptions) As usual, he delivered the speech and after that, he left Ayodhya.… (Interruptions) That was what happened on the 6th of December? Shri L.K. Advani and Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi reached Ayodhya at midnight on the 5th Decmber, 1992, escorted by Anju Gupta and stayed at Janki Mahal Trust.… (Interruptions)The Commissioner, the DIG Faizabad, the District Magistrate and the SSP, Faizabad, all the four top officers called upon them and were assured by Shri L.K. Advani and Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi that a peaceful Karseva would be carried out.… (Interruptions) Then, Shri L.K. Advani and Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi assured that they would ensure that things happened peacefully – a promise made by Shri L.K. Advani and Dr. Murli Manohar Josh..  Shri L.K. Advani and others met at the residence of Shri Vinay Katiyar before proceeding to the disputed structure. Sarvashri Vinay Katiyar, L.K. Advani, M.M. Joshi. Ashok Singhal, Acharya Giriraj Kishore, Uma Bharti, Sadhvi Ritambara and others were also present there and there is nothing on record to indicate whether it was a formal meeting or otherwise. I will ask Shri Advani and Shri Murli Manohar Joshi to tell us what happened in that breakfast meeting on the 6th December, 1992. What did you talk? What did you discuss? Tell us. Why are you not telling the House? What did you discuss on the morning of 6th December, 1992 when you met in the house of Shri Vinay Katiyar? (Interruptions) You had breakfast there and you went to that place. What did you discuss there and what did you decide? … (Interruptions)


The previous day, you promised the police officers, you promised the Additional Magistrate that you will ensure that everything goes off peacefully. … (Interruptions) Finally, what did you discuss there? Let the nation know it, you tell us. Paramhans Ramchander Dass admitted in his statement and have sworn that provocative slogans were raised on the 6th of December. I admire Paramhans Ramchander Dass. At least, even if his convictions are wrong, he had the courage of conviction to admit it. … (Interruptions) Even if his views are wrong, he had the courage to own up. Even if his slogans are dangerous, he had the courage to admit that he raised those slogans.  There is only one thing. They went there with the sole intention of destroying the Ram Janma Bhoomi-Babri Masjid structure. … (Interruptions) Madam, the Commission comes to the conclusion in paragraph 126.12 which says: “There is sufficient and believable evidence on the record including the statements of Ram Kirpal and Mark Tully etc. that provocative speeches were delivered by Uma Bharti, Sadhvi Ritambra, Paramhans Ramchander Dass, Acharya Dharmendra Dev, B.L. Sharma, Ashok Singhal and Vinay Katiyar, Vamdev, Swami Chinmayanand, Mahant Avaidyanath etc.” There is enormous evidence on record. If you do not want to read the evidence, God only can save you. … (Interruptions) But there is enormous evidence on record that provocative statements were made there. Recording of those speeches were freely made available and used to be played in most of the shops. Karsevaks were drawing pleasure in making the journalists say, “Jai Shri Ram”. Militancy was writ large among the Karsevaks. Paramhans Ramchander Dass admitted having announced on the public address system, “demolish the structure, you will not get such an opportunity”. This is the finding. Can you deny this? … (Interruptions) Ms. Anju Gupta was the Personal Security Officer to Shri Lal Krishna Advani. … (Interruptions) Ms. Anju Gupta, a lady officer, was appointed as the Personal Security Officer to Shri Advani in Ayodhya. … (Interruptions)


Anju Gupta stated that entry of the Police Control Room was quite open, there was crowd pressure from both sides of the barricade… (Interruptions) The crowd present on the pandal at the construction site near Shesh Avtar Mandir needed to be regulated… (Interruptions) There was no physical barricading
between Ram Dewar… (Interruptions) and outside of it, which provided… (Interruptions) easy scaling of the walls en masse, and entry to the premises. There was no streamlining of the crowd towards the Chabutra and from there to the exit on the western side gate, which made the entire ground open and available, for thousands of peoples to come in suddenly and occupy… (Interruptions) There were no security personnel on the roof of the domes of the structure preventing the Kar Sewaks from demolishing it. There was no crowd examination challenging the facts stated by Anju Gupta, the Security Officer of Shri L.K. Advani, on the fateful day. There is no reason to disbelieve her on these facts since she had unrestricted access… (Interruptions) as the Security Officer attached to Shri L.K. Advani… (Interruptions) to all the happenings and overall scenario in the Ram Janam Bhoomi- Babri Masjid Complex. N.C. Padhi stated that the police allowed the public meeting in the vicinity of the vulnerable object, with their hands tied and… (Interruptions) in view of the order not to fire on the Kar Sewaks by the order of the Chief Minister… (Interruptions) Sushma Ji wanted evidence. This is evidence. Anju Gupta is evidence… (Interruptions) N.C. Padhi is evidence… (Interruptions) Ram Chandra Paramhans is evidence. This evidence is… (Interruptions) What was happening that day? This is the most important part, Madam. At about noon, 12 o‟clock, a teenage Kar Sewak vaulted onto the dome and thereby signaled the breaking of the outer cordon. Other Kar Sewaks wielding pickaxes, hammers, iron-rods and shovels started scaling the Ram Dewar and over the barriers of the outer, inner and isolation cordons, from the east, west and south directions.


Madam, I ask where do the pick-axes come from? Where do the hammers come from? Where do the iron-rods come from? Where do the shovels come from? In a tremendous team-work they carried them… (Interruptions) I will


show later, they helped them carried them. They paid them money to get this and carried to the place. They stormed the disputed structure. The police deployed at the spot… (Interruptions) Please listen to this. The police deployed at the spot gave their canes and shields to the Kar Sewaks who brandished them openly. The police lathis and the police shields were given to the Kar Sewaks and the Kar Sewaks started marching towards… (Interruptions) This is very important. The Kar Sewaks‟ assault on the disputed structure started at 12.15 p.m. They first entered the Garba Griha, carefully took away the idols and cash box, etc. to a safe place. The idols and the cash box were taken to a safe place. Then they started breaking the dome and started breaking the upper plaster of the dome with hammers. In fact the demolition was accomplished by smashing holes inside the walls. Ropes were inserted through these holes in the walls under the domes, the walls were pulled down with these ropes bringing down the domes as well… (Interruptions) It is very important. The structure was not brought down by the Kar Sewaks on the domes, the structure was brought down by digging a hole in the dome, putting the ropes to the hole and pulling the dome down with the ropes… (Interruptions) It was shameful, pre-planned, conspiratorial, wanton, cold-blooded destruction of the property which they promised they would protect… (Interruptions) L.K. Advani, M.M. Joshi, Ashok Singhal, Vijayaraje Scindia, H.V. Sheshadri who were present at the Ram Katha Kunj made feeble requests to the Kar Sewaks to come down from the disputed structure either in an earnest or for the media‟s benefit. … (Interruptions) One could have reasonably perceived that the demolition of the disputed structure was not possible from the top of the domes.


No request was made to Karsevaks, not to enter the Garb Grah or not to demolish from inside under the domes. No request was made. The selected act of the leaders itself speaks about the hidden intention of one and all being to accomplish the demolition of the disputed structure. What does the Commission conclude? This charade by these leaders at the instance of L.K. Advani is in stark contradiction to their own prior conduct and their public posture, incitement and exhortations to the crowd to build a temple in place of the disputed structure. The demolition of the structure was unavoidable for the construction of a temple. They had to demolish the structure to construct the temple. Therefore, they demolished the structure. The idols and cash box removed to safe places were brought back to their original place at 7 p.m. The construction of a temporary makeshift temple commenced at 7.30 p.m..
. Even though the Chief Minister was informed about this, he gave a written order not to resort to firing under any circumstances and to take any other measure. The Magistrate ordered in writing for the forces to turn back at 2.25 p.m. The Magistrate told the forces to go back at 2.25 p.m. The police and the administration was a mute spectator. Their loyalty to the political masters was writ large. Listen to Shri Kalyan Singh‟s reaction: “It was like a badly inflated balloon that burst.” Babri Masjid structure, according to Shri Kalyan Singh, was a badly inflated balloon which burst. He further says: “All other political parties are to be blamed for frustration of Karsevaks. They should arrest me because after all I fulfilled one of the major objectives of our Party and have redeemed the Party‟s election manifesto.” This is what Shri Kalyan Singh said.




Where is Sushma ji? There is no doubt at all, from the evidence and testimony before the Commission that the Sangh Parivar, especially the Bajrang Dal, RSS, VHP, BJP and Shiv Sena cadres created circumstances consistently over a period of a decade which ultimately resulted in the events of December 6th, 1992. Sushma ji, there is an evidence. Where is she? I want her to read the evidence. It stood established before me beyond reasonable doubt that the Joint Common Enterprise was a pre-planned act for demolition under the immediate leadership of Vinay Katiyar, Paramhans Ramchander Dass, Ashok Singhal, Champat Rai, Swami Chinmayanand, S.C. Dixit, B.P. Singhal and Acharya Giriraj. They were the local leaders on the spot and the executors of the plan conceived by the RSS. The plan was conceived by the RSS. The other leaders cannot be absolved of their vicarious liability and were willing collaborators playing the roles assigned to them by the RSS. Their informed support for the Ayodhya campaign, fortified by their physical presence during the grand finale of the prolonged campaign is irrefutably established.


 I conclude that the BJP, VHP, Shiv Sena and their office bearers as named in this report, in connivance with Kalyan Singh, the then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh entered into a Joint Common Enterprise for the purpose of demolition of the disputed structure and the construction of temple in its place … (Interruptions) Friends, what is your answer to this conclusion? Let us debate it. Come along. I will give you another opportunity to debate it. What is your answer to this conclusion? … (Interruptions)


It was openly asserted and commonly accepted that the pre-partition Jan Sangh was the political wing of RSS. The Jan Sangh, later, was renamed as the Bharatiya Janata Party. Though some of the leaders have tried to claim that the BJP and RSS are independent organizations, in another part of this Report, the Commission has dealt with the question and concluded that they are functionally, if not legally, intertwined and inseparable. RSS and BJP are intertwined and inseparable. The admission by Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhya, in no uncertain terms, in his books that he was deputed by the RSS to organize the Bharatiya Jan Sangh is a clear indicator of this relationship. Even on date, the RSS Office bearers, Swayam Sewaks are deputed by RSS to carry out the work of BJP; the top echelon of the BJP leadership is pre-dominantly from the RSS and they are guided by its thoughts and philosophy in governance. The RSS has considerable influence on the leadership not only of BJP but also on the other allied organizations participating in the temple construction movement or which have Hinduism as their objective. Using its sweeping influence over the organizers and the institutions participating, the RSS controlled every aspect of the Ayodhya movement. Despite the attempts made to distance the RSS or BJP from the movement by attributing the movement to the VHP or the dharam sansad, I have concluded that all the other members of the Sangh Pariwar are merely frontal organizations of RSS deputed to working in different fields. There was no illusion in the minds of a common man that RSS or the VHP were either different or distant from the BJP, or that their objectives were not identical. … (Interruptions)





 Madam, in conclusion, let me say the horrendous consequences of 6th December, 1992 resulted in riots and doom. From December 1992 to January, February, March 1993, in all 2,019 people were killed in a matter of three months and 7,786 people were injured in a matter of three months… (Interruptions) Hindus were killed. Muslims were killed. People belonging to other faiths were killed. Police men were killed. The violence that was unleashed by the horrendous crime of 6th December 1992 continues to divide our country even today.… (Interruptions)


I would have thought, after the Liberhan Commission‟s Report, after this debate, there will be shame, remorse and contriteness. Unfortunately, the civilized discourse in our country seems to have bid good bye to shame, remorse and contriteness. RSS and the Sangh Parivar have no shame, no remorse, no contriteness and continue to divide the country.… (Interruptions)

Madam, let me conclude by saying that there are two ideas in India. One is the idea of India represented by the Congress and all other secular parties. And the other is the idea of India represented by the divisive politics of the BJP. I am sorry to quote from an article I wrote many months ago.… (Interruptions) But I want to quote this.

Jawaharlal Nehru once said, “India is like an ancient palimpsest on which layer upon layer of thought and reverie had been inscribed and yet no succeeding layer had completely hidden or erased what had been written. ” There are two ideas of India. This is the first time the BJP, an Indian political party, openly adopted a divisive and an extreme agenda. The question then that everyone‟s mind was, “will it succeed”? Apparently, it succeeded. It succeeded in 1998.… (Interruptions) The first real test over the division of Bengal… (Interruptions) for ever from India came in 2004. In 2004, the Congress Party put across another idea of India where India must be an inclusive nation.
India must celebrate its diversity. All Indians must be encouraged to develop an Indian identity even when they are proud of their respective language or religion. This is an idea that India is a nation where no one valley, no one institution … (Interruptions) will dominate over others. The two ideas of India clashed in 2004. What did the people vote for? Forget the conclusion of Justice Liberhan. Forget the indictment of Justice Liberhan.

In 2004 when the two ideas of India – one led by the BJP in power with the Prime Minister, with the Deputy Prime Minister, with the entire State establishment put forward an idea of India of a divisive agenda; the other of the Congress Party and the secular parties put forward an idea of India, of an inclusive India. The people of India voted for our idea. The people of India rejected you. The judgement of the people of India is greater than the judgement of Justice Liberhan. Justice Liberhan‟s is a Commission. The people of India are our ultimate masters. They rejected you. They rejected you in 2004. When you went to them in 2009, they rejected you in 2009 also.

Madam, let me conclude by saying only one idea will clearly prevail, that is the idea of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and Dr. Ambedkar. India will be an inclusive nation. India will be a plural nation. In India no idea will dominate another idea. No institution will dominate another institution. We have brought together our idea of India. Our idea of India will prevail. Jai Hind.

13 comments:

  1. Good speech from Chidambaram. It's a pity there were so many interruptions though.

    Unfortunately, the BJP is going to politicize the case even when judgment and investigation is impartial. I wonder if there will be enough political will to bring the culprits to justice. I hope so...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Welcome to this blog Bhagwad. Yes the speech was unusually candid and strong on Sangh Parivar to come from a Congress Minister.BJP wants to say proudly that they demolished the Masjid,but is afraid that the electorate will not like the fascist side of its face.
    Bringing the culprits to justice? unlikely.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is a good speech.. but then I am not sure if the Congress should come out as saints.. the divisive tactics has been used by all the parties...

    it is more glaring in the state of Kerala in the back drop of the recent terrorists issue.... all the parties have used the fundamental muslim parties for votes but are now pretending to be saints...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Happy Kitten, yes it was a really attacking speech. Congress leaders in the 1980s and 90s starting from the time of Rajiv Gandhi were never ready to take a tough stand against hindutva forces.Babri Masjid was demolished because of that hesitancy.
    Now I think the current leaders are more confident of calling the bluff of BJP.
    Yes, you are correct.All political parties have tried to play caste and religious cards trying to appease Christian,Muslims, Hindu,Nair,Ezhava etc. In Kerala's context BJP,Muslim League and the Kerala Congress are openly communal while the Congress and to lesser extend the Left secretly try to get votes using communal issues.

    ReplyDelete
  5. each one of them - the speaker and the audience and those who are silent listeners and those who are shouting and yelling are playing just one game " BLAME GAME" or better still - "pass the parcel"

    ReplyDelete
  6. Guess there is only one solution if India should continue to be a secular country..(nd wonder why Chidambaram did not conlcude the speech thus ) ...

    ban the political parties that are openly communal.... it would be indeed good riddance (to bad rubbish) to Kerala Congress, Muslim League and even the BJP if they cant live w/a the RSS or the various Senas.. if the RSS claim to be the only true cultural representatives of India then let them stay out of politics.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anrosh, I can understand your cynicism. But equating every one sitting in the Parliament as equally responsible is not correct.
    The BJP behaved very undemocratically by trying to drown out Chidambaram's speech for 2 hours instead of the usual protest walk out.
    Sangh Parivar is responsible Masjid demolition while Narasimha Rao Govt is resposible for not preventing it.Here again we cannot equate Congress and the BJP.
    Equating a hardened criminal with a small time robber only helps the hardened criminal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Happy Kitten,
    Yes communal Parties should ideally not function here. But instead of an official ban a ban by the voters would be the best solution.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Even though we know the facts, reading the shamelessness with which this was conducted gave me goose bumps. I am so glad the BJP have lost twice - I can't understand their divisive, regressive, 'might is right', 'majority is right', 'violence is right'.... kind of ideology.
    I was really proud of the Indian voter, and very relieved too, in 2004 and 2009 elections, I just wish we had a 'real' opposition with acceptable democratic, progressive, inclusive ideology. These are non-negotiables. They may disagree about SEZs, waiver of farmers' loans, education policies, even renaming of cities instead of providing infrastructure... but these basics can't be compromised.

    Loved these lines...

    India will be an inclusive nation. India will be a plural nation. In India no idea will dominate another idea. No institution will dominate another institution. We have brought together our idea of India. Our idea of India will prevail.

    Thanks for sharing the speech. Tweeted this post :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. IHM, The speech was good,and that was why BJP tried to drown out as it was being telecast live by the news channels. I wish the actions will also follow.
    Thank you for tweeting the link.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Splendid ideas, I have been wondering how to start writing my speech which is due in next month, thanks for that complete resource. I will be looking forward for more interesting things.

    Informative speeches

    ReplyDelete
  12. ks.

    i still remember the horror and shock when doordarshan reported that 'damage' was done to 2 of the domes of barbari masjid. cable tv was a rare thing then. soon, we got telephones from relatives from USA to say that the entire structure was demolished. the feeling that ensued was fear. thought it was the begining of the end of Indian democracy.
    but no. despite the culprits going around scot free, India has not been reduced to theocracy.the secular democracy survived. india cannot but continue to remain a secular, pluralistic democracy.
    terrible things happened in india after the demolition. but india still goes strong.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now keep it up!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are welcome especially if you do not think like me. But anonymous comments behind masks and those not relevant to the post are not encouraged.