|
Click
here if you would like to Contribute.
Click
here if you would like to send Feedback.
Click
here to read related articles
Click
here to Read Part 1
Take
for example the Godhra incident. Though
it was very clear as to which community perpetrated that
evil and their number was running to 2000 minimum, the Police
could arrest only six or so including the Muslim President
of Godhra Municipality belonging to (secular) Congress Party
after three days on March 3. Here too,
see the attitude and vote bank mindset of our politicians
who open their mouths only to utter political nonsense either
to please their supreme leader or the vote bank. Again one
example will suffice. In the Star TV interview on March
3, 2002, the newsreader asked Mrs.Sushma Swaraj, Union Minister
for Information and Broadcasting, who was in the studio,
whether there was party politics behind the violence as
the Municipality President belonged to the Minority wing
of Congress. However, Mrs.Swaraj
said that it was too early to give it a political colour
as the investigations were still going on.
After
a break, Congress leader Mr.Kamal Nath too was called to
the studio to sit beside Mrs.Swaraj to reply to their queries.
Mr.Kamal Nath after explaining
his spot inspection findings concluded saying the arrested
were BJP leaders. Mrs.Swaraj retorted and advised Mr.Kamal
Nath not to jump to conclusions, as before he arrived in
the studio, the Star News reader had asked her the same
question and "I said I am not going to blame a political
party at this stage". Do you see the difference between
a so-called secular politician and a so-called "communal"
(or a Hindu fanatic) politician? Shame.
Before
the question was taken to a logical end, the question-answer
ended abruptly to continue the newscast. That is how Star
TV operates. Perhaps it didn't want to expose Mr.Kamal Nath
playing politics even in the midst of such a heart-wrenching
tragedy. It is better Mrs. Sonia Gandhi stopped two
of her spokespersons, namely this Mr.Kamal Nath (no matter,
a good fund raiser) and the political renegade Mr.Jaipal
Reddy from being the spokespersons for the party to
protect her and her party's credibility in the eyes of intelligent
Indian voters.
When
an editor of the stature of Vinod Mehta of Outlook
asked the question in the "Big Fight" "how could 2000 people
all of a sudden in 10 minutes gather to attack the train
killing 58 persons (26 women and 16 children)", there was
interruption and the anchorman of Star TV simply prevented
an answer by moving on deliberately to another question.
This kind of TV programmes based on the evil principle of
"suppressio veri and suggestio falsie" should be
eschewed in the name of, if not God and fair-play, at least
during our life time as the Pak TV anchor piously hoped.
Now
a revert to Pak TV. A panelist brought up the legal issue
relating to Ayodhya dispute and spoke of the doctrine of
estoppel. Under this doctrine of estoppel, a person is prevented
from either denying or asserting something (in this case
the existence of Ram Temple in the place where existed the
demolished Babri Masjid or the claim that it was the place
where exactly Lord Ram was born) on the ground that do so
contradicts what has already been admitted or decided either
explicitly in words or implicitly in action. The fact that
Babur (1483-1530) built the mosque in the 16th century and
we are now in the 21st century, should therefore, invite
the doctrine of estoppel in deciding the case after nearly
600 years. As for the birth of Lord Ram, nobody is sure
whether he was born or not.
But
the Hindus, specially VHP leaders, say Lord Ram's birth
in Ayodhya is a matter of religious faith and like in all
other religions this faith, supported by and affirmed in
epic Ramayan and other holy books of Hindus, cannot be questioned
either by politicians or the law courts.
It
is not, therefore, surprising that Mr.Tarun Vijay, Editor,
Panchajanya magazine asked in the "We the people" programme
of Star TV on Sunday night, "Why Hindus
should not have Ayodhya when the Muslims have their Mecca
and Christians their Rome?" His arguments drew spontaneous
applause among majority of the participants though secularists
like Mrs. Margaret Alva (former Union Minister) sulked.
This
only confirms what the panelist of Pak TV said; that India
though has a secular constitution is a non-secular society.
to
be concluded in the next edition.
K.B.Ganapathy,
Editor,
Star of Mysore, Evening daily,
Mysore.
Click
here to Read Part 1
Click here to read related articles
Click here if you would like to Contribute.
Click
here if you would like to send Feedback.
|
