Opposition says SC’s Ayodhya verdict should be respected
Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress offered no comments or tweets on the verdict. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader, Akhilesh Yadav, who cancelled his public engagements in the wake of the judgment, wrote a poem but without any direct mention of Ayodhya case.Updated: Nov 10, 2019 00:39 IST
Many Opposition parties hailed the Supreme Court verdict on the long-standing Ayodhya dispute while appealing for peace even as even as one party chose to remain silent while another maintained that some parts of the judgment are “questionable.”
Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) leader, Mayawati, maintained that the judgment of the apex court should be respected. “I appeal that the Honourable Supreme Court’s historic verdict through consensus, in accordance with the Constitution by Babasaheb Ambedkar, should be respected and the next steps should be taken in a similar harmonious atmosphere,” Mayawati tweeted.
Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress offered no comments or tweets on the verdict. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader, Akhilesh Yadav, who cancelled his public engagements in the wake of the judgment, wrote a poem but without any direct mention of Ayodhya case. “A decision which reduces distances/ makes people better human beings.”
Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) went a step further and asked political parties to focus on public services while respecting the verdict. In his tweet, RJD chief, Tejaswi Yadav, said, “We respect the verdict of the apex court. All the temples, masjids, gurdwaras and churches belong to us. Nothing or no one belongs to outsiders. Everything belongs to us. Now, political parties should focus on good schools, colleges, hospitals and on providing job opportunities for young people.”
The Telugu Desam Party (TDP) chief, Chandrababu Naidu, tweeted: “The unanimous decision taken by the panel of esteemed judges must be respected. I request all to maintain peace and harmony.”
Similarly, DMK chief MK Stalin tweeted that the apex court has found a solution for a long-pending dispute, adding that he believes that the judgment will be accepted by all.
The CPI(M) took a nuanced stand while reiterating that it always maintained the Ayodhya case must be solved by a judicial verdict in the absence of negotiations. The CPIM politburo, however, also pointed at some “questionable premises” of the verdict.
In a statement, the Politburo said: “The CPI(M) has always maintained that the issue should be resolved by a judicial verdict if a negotiated settlement was not possible. While this judgment has provided a judicial resolution to this fractious issue there are certain premises of the judgment which are questionable.
“The Court judgment has itself stated that the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992 was a violation of law. This was a criminal act and an assault on the secular principle. The cases pertaining to the demolition should be expedited and the guilty punished. The Court has also appreciated the 1991 Places of Religious Worship Act. Adherence to this law should ensure that no such disputes on religious places are again raised and utilized.”