VHP's Alok Kumar cited Indira Gandhi's example to say an ordinance can be brought. He said after Indira's election from Rae Bareli was set aside, she moves Supreme Court though she knew she there was no ground. it was in pendency she changed the definition of corrupt practice in RPA and court had to overturn HC's order.
Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) international working president Alok Kumar has reiterated the organisation’s demand that the government enact a law to start the construction of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. Speaking at an event in Delhi on Thursday, Kumar said that if a Bill for construction of the temple in Ayodhya is tabled in the Parliament, it will sail through easily because all political parties including the Congress are bound to support it.
“You don’t want to vote (in favour of the bill), don’t vote, but you can’t oppose it otherwise all your branding of Hindutva will collapse,” Kumar said questioning the Congress’ stand on the matter. “Parties that are not part of NDA will face difficulty in opposing the Bill. If the Bill is brought, it will pass with a brute majority,” he added. If Ram Lalla wants, the VHP leader said, we will soon announce the date for kar seva.
On taking the ordinance route, Kumar said that the government overturned the Supreme Court’s decision on the SC/ST Act. “First the government had moved a review petition. But in the pendency, a bill was brought to overturn the decision.”
Citing another example, he said, “When Indira Gandhi was found guilty of corrupt practices and her election from Rae Bareli was set aside by the High Court, she had moved an appeal in the Supreme Court. Indiraji knew very well that there was no ground in her appeal. But in the pendency, she changed the definition of corrupt practice in the Representation of the People Act and Supreme Court had to overturn the High Court’s verdict.”
So this (ordinance) can be brought, both have different jurisdiction, he argued.
Explaining why there is a need of taking the ordinance route, Kumar said, “In the criminal case, the SC directed the lower court to complete the hearing by March 2019. When the lower court said there are hundreds of witnesses and files, the SC said ‘heaven may fall, bur justice be done’. These words are very beautiful, but the Supreme Court is not applying this on own. Why?”
People are asking us why we are in a hurry, he said, adding “we are waiting for the last 68 years”. The first petition was filed by Gopal Sharma in 1950 and the matter Supreme Court in 2001. “For how long you will take agni pariksha of Hindus?” he asked.
BJP’s Rajya Sabha MP Rakesh Sinha too echoed similar sentiments and sought to know whether Congress and others will support his private member bill on Ram Mandir.
“There are two aspects in a democracy. When there is a controversy, the judiciary plays an important role. Indian society has full faith in the judiciary. When the (Supreme) Court said that this is not an important matter for the court, then the second aspect of democracy is Parliament. The decision of Parliament is uncontested, unchallenged. No one can challenge the sovereignty of Parliament. The last option before the Bharatiya samaj (society) is that a law should be enacted for construction of Ram Mandir,” he said.
The Ram Mandir issue is currently pending before the Supreme Court. The court on October 29 said that it will decide in the first week of January which appropriate bench will hear the matter.