India’s controversial regulation on locations of worship

India’s highest court docket is listening to quite a lot of petitions difficult a decades-old regulation that preserves the character and identification of non secular locations as they existed on the time of the nation’s independence in 1947.

The regulation, launched in 1991, prohibits the conversion or alteration of the character of anyplace of worship and prevents courts from listening to disputes over its standing, apart from Babri Masjid casewhich was explicitly exempt.

The Babri Masjid, a Sixteenth-century mosque, was on the middle of a long-running battle, culminating in its demolition by a Hindu mob in 1992. A court docket verdict in 2019. attributed the site to Hindus for the development of a temple, reigniting debates on India’s non secular and secular fault strains.

Present petitions, together with one from a member of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Get together (BJP), declare that the 1991 regulation infringes on non secular freedom and constitutional secularism.

The listening to takes place towards the backdrop of Hindu teams submitting complaints difficult the standing of many mosquesclaiming they had been constructed on demolished Hindu temples.

Many, together with opposition leaders and Muslim teams, have defended the regulation, saying it’s essential to safeguarding locations of worship for non secular minorities in Hindu-majority India. Additionally they query the character of the historic proof offered by the petitioners in assist of their claims.

They are saying that if the regulation is repealed or diluted, it might pave the best way for a number of comparable challenges and inflame non secular tensions, significantly between Hindus and Muslims.

The Supreme Court docket on Thursday barred courts from registering new instances difficult the possession of locations of worship or ordering investigations to determine their character and identification till additional orders. The subsequent listening to is scheduled for February.

The regulation states that the non secular character of all locations of worship – temples, mosques, church buildings and gurdwaras – should be maintained because it was on August 15, 1947, when India grew to become impartial.

The Locations of Worship (Particular Provisions) Act 1991 was handed by the then Congress social gathering authorities amid a motion – led by members of the Hindu nationalist social gathering BJP – to construct a temple on the location of the Babri Masjid within the northern city of Ayodhya was rising stronger. This aggressive marketing campaign sparked riots in a number of elements of the nation and, in keeping with some estimatesbrought about tons of of deaths.

The violence is a painful reminder of the non secular conflicts India witnessed throughout this era. partition in 1947.

Whereas presentation the invoice in Parliament, the then Dwelling Minister SB Chavan expressed concern over “an alarming rise in intolerance being propagated by sure sections for his or her slender pursuits”..

These teams, he defined, had been resorting to “pressured conversion” of locations of worship in an try and create new conflicts.

The BJP, then in opposition, strongly opposed the invoice, with some lawmakers strolling out of Parliament. A celebration lawmaker mentioned he believed the invoice was aimed toward appeasing minorities and would solely widen the divide between Hindus and Muslims.

Other than archaeological websites – non secular or not – the one exception to the regulation was the Babri Mosque, as a authorized problem towards the construction already existed earlier than independence.

Hindu mobs, nonetheless, demolished the mosque a number of months after the regulation was handed. In 2019, whereas awarding the disputed land to Hindu teams, the Indian Supreme Court docket declared that the demolition of the mosque was an unlawful act.

The Supreme Court docket’s resolution on this regulation will likely be essential for the destiny of dozens of non secular constructions, significantly Muslim ones, contested by Hindu teams. These embrace Gyanvapi and Shahi Eidgah, two disputed mosques within the holy cities of Varanasi and Mathura.

Critics additionally level out that the historic nature of the websites will make it troublesome to determine divergent claims conclusively, leaving room for bitter interfaith battles and violence.

Whereas the listening to is carefully monitored, the regulation additionally makes the information at any time when a brand new growth happens in instances involving mosques.

Two weeks in the past, a Rajasthan court docket issued a discover to the federal government after admitting a petition claiming that the revered Ajmer Sharif dargah – a Thirteenth-century Sufi shrine that pulls 1000’s of holiday makers on daily basis – stood at- above a Hindu temple.

And final month, 4 individuals had been killed within the city of Sambhal in Uttar Pradesh state when violence erupted throughout a court-ordered inspection of a Sixteenth-century mosque. Muslim teams challenged the investigation within the Supreme Court docket.

There have been tensions over different court-ordered investigations earlier, notably within the Gyanvapi Mosque case. Hindu teams mentioned the Seventeenth-century mosque was constructed by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb on the partial ruins of the Kashi Vishwanath temple. Muslim teams opposed the investigation ordered by a neighborhood court docket, saying it violated the 1991 regulation.

However in 2022, a Supreme Court docket bench led by then-Chief Justice DY Chandrachud didn’t stop the investigation from persevering with. He additionally noticed that the 1991 regulation didn’t stop inquiries into the standing of a spot of worship as of August 15, 1947, so long as it didn’t search to vary it.

Many have criticized the transfer since then, with former civil servant Harsh Mander saying it “opened the floodgates to this sequence of court docket orders opposite to the 1991 regulation”.

“For those who permit the examine of a mosque to find out whether or not a temple lies beneath it, however then prohibit actions to revive a temple on that web site, that may be a surefire recipe for fueling resentment, hatred and worry that might explode for years into bitter disputes between individuals of various faiths,” Mr. Mander mentioned. wrote.

Thursday’s Supreme Court docket order signifies that these investigations and ongoing trials stay suspended for now.

Observe BBC Information India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter And Facebook