Jyoti Basu on the Demolition of the Babri Masjid

I AM happy to hear that People's Democracy, our weekly paper is bringing out a
special edition on the tenth anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Masjid in
Ayodhya. I wish to place on record what I remember about that shameful event
which sent shock waves not only through India, but throughout the world. Once
before, on October 30, 1990 when Mulayam Singh Yadav of the Samajwadi Party
was leading the government in Uttar Pradesh, the Babri Masjid was attacked by
BJP-supported kar sevaks, some of whom mounted the dome of the Masjid. The
police had to resort to firing and some people were killed, including one volunteer
from Kolkata. Thereafter riots took place in some parts of India and in
Bangladesh, where some temples were attacked.

This was the background in which once again, when the BJP was in power in UP,
with its government being headed by Kalyan Singh, the kar sevaks declared a
march to Ayodhya to protest against the attack on them earlier. When asked by
the Supreme Court on a petition made before it, why the kar sevaks were going
there, the counsel for the UP government stated that their intention was to pray
and sing religious songs.

Our Party demanded a meeting of the National Integration Council and the then
Congress prime minister, P V Narasimha Rao did call a meeting on November 23,
1992 in Delhi which Harkishen Singh Surjeet, our Party's general secretary and I
attended. I think no representative of the BJP spoke in the meeting. But all others
called upon the prime minister to take adequate steps for the protection of the
Masjid. Surjeet, on behalf of our Party, urged upon the PM to use Article 356 to
remove the government if there was no other alternative for protecting the Masjid,
despite the fact that we have been opposing Article 356, which for most of the
time has been used wrongly by the central government. Prime Minister
Narasimha Rao gave the assurance in the meeting that his government would
maintain the rule of law by any means. He also reported in the meeting that the
three-months of discussion between the centre and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad,
had fallen through. It was alleged by different parties, including V P Singh, that
the BJP and its sangh parivar was subverting the Constitution, parliamentary
democracy and the Court.

Two days before the demolition, I rang up the PM to tell him that alarming news
was coming in about the preparations being made by the kar sevaks, to attack the
Masjid. He told me that the Congress Working Committee would be meeting to
discuss the situation. But no action was taken by the central government, and as
planned, the Masjid was razed to the ground, with the police looking on. It was
reported that a few top leaders of the BJP, including some who are now ministers
of the BJP-led government, were present during this dastardly act, and cases are
pending against them.

When Surjeet and I later met the PM we asked him why no attempt was made to
save the Masjid; his only reply was that he could not distrust the chief minister of
the state who assured him that nothing untoward would happen.

Communalism of the majority does lead, in some areas of our country, to minority
communalism, helped by Pakistan and some other countries. The Congress(I),
the biggest non-communal party in the Opposition at the centre, and now ruling
in 14 states, is as yet not self-critical, and does not feel the necessity of any
ideological campaign against the communal and fascistic forces.

EVIDENCE ON RECORD

I was asked by the Justice Liberhan Commission, set up a long time back to
probe the demolition of the Masjid, to give evidence before it. I met the
Commission for two days on January 29 and March 15, in the year 2001, and
placed all these facts before it. I also presented the Commission with a cassette
containing the speech of the ex-chief minister, Kalyan Singh in Kolkata after his
government was dismissed. In the course of this speech, he gleefully, and with
great pride, among other things, stated that the demolition was a great
achievement, and a new era had begun in India.

I think it is worthwhile to add that because of my statements on communalism

and calling such acts "uncivilised and barbaric", the prime minister Atal Behari
Vajpayee, at a subsequent meeting in Kolkata said that he would ask me why I
used such language. In the discussions with me which followed the meeting, I
told him that I had not mentioned individuals, but I was of the view that vicious
attacks against other religions, and demolition of their houses of prayer, are in
my view, barbarous and uncivilised. They are also against our concept of unity in
diversity, and do violence to our Constitution. I reminded him that he had at least
expressed regret after the demolition, but his other colleagues had justified the
demolition and there were criminal cases pending against them. I also told him
that he listens to the RSS, the VHP and the Bajrang Dal, because he knows
otherwise what fate awaits him.

Now on the Gujarat barbarism the PM on the one hand says he cannot show his
face outside India, but, at the same time continues to support chief minister
Narendra Modi.

PEOPLE’S DEMOCRACY, December 08, 2002

Jyoti Basu’s Deposition before Liberhan Commission:

I am happy that I have been given the opportunity to appear before the
Commission. I wish to make a few points on the demolition of the Babri Masjid
and reply to any queries.

· There were reports that the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya may be attacked by the Kar
Sevaks. The then prime minister Sri Narsimha Rao, convened the meeting of
the National Integration Council on November 23, 1992. On behalf of the
CPI(M), Harkishan Singh Surjeet, the general secretary, and I attended the
meeting. No member of the BJP attended it. Unanimously, powers were given
to Sri Narsimha Rao to take necessary measures to protect the Masjid. On our
party’s behalf we proposed that even Article 356 of the Constitution may be
used if there is no other way to protect it, though we have been opposing its
use.

· Two days before the demolition, i.e., on December 4, 1992, I rang up the prime
minister to inform him that there was apprehension that the Masjid may be
attacked and hence something has to be done to protect it. The prime minister
said the Working Committee of the Congress was to meet on the issue. But
your lordship knows what happened.

· After the UP government was dismissed, Sri Kalyan Singh addressed a meeting
in Calcutta on February 2, 1993, as recorded by the police. The Hindi speech,
along with its English translation, is also with me. I shall leave these with you.
I particularly draw your attention to that part of the speech in which he speaks
 about the demolition of the mosque: “I express before you, I did not have any
repentance, nor any pangs or agony for the case, and I had a pleasure to
declare it as a historic day. I can tell you, my dear friends, without the
inspiration of God such a colossal job of demolition could not have been
pulled off within five hours without using any explosive device. Even if we
engaged a labour contractor for the same, the contractor might have taken at
least one and half months time for the said purpose, including removal of
huge amount of debris. You know, the birth of new Indian era will take place
with some glorious future after December 6, 1992. The demolition of the
structure (though some sections of people took it for a shame for the Nation)
has become an affair of pride to the Nation.”

· In the third week of December, 1993, Surjeet and I met the prime minister and
asked him why nothing was done. He said, “How could I disbelieve a chief
minister when he assured me that no harm will be done to the Masjid.” I then
presented the cassette to him and told him what I told you now. I do not know
whether he heard the cassette.

· The present prime minister, Sri Vajpayee, met me on March 20, 1999, in Calcutta
and asked me why I called the BJP barbaric and uncivilised. I said I do not
normally name anybody, but I do call the demolition a barbaric act, and I asked
him how did it happen and what language should I use. He said “It was an
accident and not organised”. I told him about Kalyan Singh’s speech. He kept
quiet. Now he is saying something else - “expression of national sentiment”.

We shall await the findings of the Commission.