The Supreme Court today (Wednesday, March 6) reserved its order on resolving the long-running Ayodhya land dispute by mediation, stating that the party can meanwhile suggest the names of possible mediators that may be appointed in case to send its matter for mediation.
A five-judge Constitution bench, deliberating on the matter, appeared divided on whether mediation was the best way to resolve the decades-old dispute which concerns members of Hindu and Muslim communities.
Some of the Hindu litigants in the case, including Ram Lalla Virajman group, had opposed the mediation claiming the matter related to the birthplace of the Hindu deity and no party can alone appropriate a matter of faith in the mediation process. They also said that several such attempts have failed in the past.
APN in its popular show have chosen this topic for discussion with Anchorperson Vandana along with Amrendra Nath Singh (Senior Advocate Allahabad High Court), APN consultant Govindpant Raju, Muslim scholar Razik Wadud, Sangh thinker Ashok Sinha, Rashtriya Mahasachiv Munna Sharma, Congress leader Lalit Sharma, Muslim scholar Shoaib Alam, BJP leader Kunal Kohli.
Shoaib Alam was the first to speak and said “We were always ready for a settlement through a dialogue conversation but some of the members of Hindu Mahasabha are opposing it for their personal reasons.”
Munna Sharma said “We cannot comprise at any cost on the land where Lord Rama was born and the Court is also with us and we believe that Mosque can be built elsewhere…Why only Ayodhya?”
He also added that “If Muslims are ready to obey the court orders and are ready for mediation then why aren’t they agreeing for the construction of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.”
Alam said “We are just obeying the court orders because we respect their decision.”
Kunal Kohli said “This is not a property dispute; it’s a dispute between two religious beliefs, between two community, the court has asked for mediation because it can be the way them to solve the issue which has been running from a long time.”
Raju said “I think Supreme Court is not paying that much attention over the issue as Court accepts evidence not emotions, and the court’s statement over the issue is misleading.”
Amarendra said “ The court have asked for mediators and after that a body of mediators will be framed then it will take more months and it’s a very long process, how can it satisfy the people who are demanding quick response.”
Munna Sharma said “The court’s decision is not satisfactory as it will make the decision- making process more complex and it is time taking as well.”
Ashok Sinha said “All these things were proposed earlier also but even then the situation remains the same and this time too thing are not appearing clear as after the court’s decision.”
Rajik Wadud said “Members of Sunni Waqf Board and even some members of Nirmohi Akhara feels that the court decision can be a good initiative in handling the long running dispute. “
He also added that “This dispute can be only settled through proper discussion under the guidance of Supreme Court as it is acceptable for the members of both the community.”
Lalit Sharma said “Congress cannot make any decision as we have decision making body as Supreme Court and there is no need of blaming any party for the delay in decision making process.”
Ashok Sinha said “The court has asked for the name of mediators, from where the mediator will come from, they will also be humans like us and dispute can arise there as well so how the dispute will be settled? “
Alam said “Muslims were ready for mediation earlier also but it could not happen because political parties started their own propaganda.”
Ashok Sinha said “Political parties don’t want any decision to come before general elections as it will affect their vote bank.”
In an overall discussion it has come to our knowledge that the members present in the discussion feel that mediation cannot be a solution for the long-running Ayodhya land dispute.
Compiled by- Dhiraj kumar