Liberhan Commission Report On Babri Masjid

Liberhan Commission Report on Babri Masjid Justice M.S. Liberhan Commission of Enquiry submitted its report on demolition of Babri Masjid on 6th December 1992. Selective leakages and thereafter extracts of the report have been published by the media. The commission was set up within ten days of the event on 16th December 1992 and has outlasted any other commission perhaps going into Guinness Book of Records! 48 extensions and 17 years time frame was designed to test the patience of the people. Not that anyone really cares for what the report says, but it speaks volumes about what is not there in the report perhaps. 1. When observations have been made with references to Atal Behari Vajpayee, who was not present at the site, why he was not summoned for any clarifications or information? It is unjust to drag his name without giving him an opportunity to tell the truth. 2. Why is there no reference to P.V.Narsimha Rao, then the Prime Minister, who reportedly went to sleep when the Babri Masjid was being demolished? Wasn’t the Union home minister having any responsibility and role to safeguard the structure? Didn’t home ministry have any intelligence reports on intentions of karsevaks if there was a conspiracy? 3. Why the commission was given 17 long years and 48 extensions to come out with a report only at a politically convenient time to suit the Congress and just when BJP is at nadir of its fortune? 4. The final outcome of commission’s findings is released only when they become irrelevant. Or, perhaps this time the commission was not to be given extension due to austerity measures (sick) and was forced to submit winding up report? 5. Why was there a deliberate leakage of the report when it was only with the home minister? And predictably there was some call for setting up another commission of enquiry on this leakage! 6. Why public money is being wasted on such political tools to fool the public? 7. Now Liberhan Commission Report is handed over to CBI as proof to proceed further in prosecution. Is CBI itself not mandated and competent enough to investigate & find out what happened and who is the culprit? Has the government “outsourced” the fact finding & investigative task to Liberhan Commission taking it away from CBI? 8. Didn’t some one say justice delayed is justice denied? Is this “Pseudo justice”? Safety Valves: The commissions of enquiries have been always used to cool off the public anger and to let the time take care of the issues involved. It is only an escape valve to let off the steam. Commissions of enquiry have been set up in the past by states and the centre whenever there have public disturbances, riots or violence of unusual nature. A retired judge is appointed as chairman of the commission to give a sense of impartiality and sound

analysis but not the judgment. With a report from a retired judge the government acquires a moral high ground to deal with opposition. Most of such cases could have been dealt with by CBI which has the necessary mandate and specialization for investigation. Strengthen CBI: When there is a need to have a fact finding mission about an event, invariably there is a court case and the matter is sub-judice. The prosecution (or the government) needs to gather evidences and supporting witnesses to present the case to the court. The government should therefore leave the matter to the investigative agencies and not find a substitute like a retired judge. If required, CBI should hire a retired judge to do the work and submit the findings just like they would hire a sleuth. CBI should have enough teeth without political interference to investigate the matter. Does CBI have authority to reject the findings of a commission and trust its own assessment? At least CBI would not have taken 17 years to present a report of their findings. More Senas and Dals: There are many Senas and Dals of different hues and shades all over the country which are the fronts for political parties to engineer public unrests. Be it problems in Godhra, Goa, Mangalore, Mumbai, or Orissa the state governments set up commissions of enquiry and perhaps no one knows what happens to them. When inconvenient the Centre appoints another commission, like Laloo Prasad Yadav did to get contrasting report on Godhra. One lesson from appointing such commissions is that we should be ready for tackling more of such public disturbances. Today we have separate National Investigative Agency for terror related cases. CBI now focuses on corruption and criminal cases. Why can’t we have an independent agency or a wing under CBI exclusively for politically triggered public disturbances? Possibly such cases will be more in numbers and more frequent than terror events. In such cases generally there will be a political pressure to submit report before the next session of the assembly or parliament. At least there will be a reasonable time frame for investigation and lesser waste of public money. As far as the utility of the Liberhan Commission report is concerned the government should reflect on what administrative steps should be taken to make it more responsive in future. But the simple facts stand out like Congress first opened the doors of Ayodhya site for limited worship. That was the first mistake. Then Congress at the Centre slept when the structure was being demolished. That was second mistake. The Liberhan Commission was allowed 48 extensions because of which it was robbed of legitimacy as well as seriousness was the third one. And the report was leaked before being tabled in the parliament was the fourth one. Well, it is not that BJP has done nothing wrong. But Congress in power could have done much more by being proactive instead of passive player & a mute witness and now trying to rewrite the history to project itself as the savior of secularism.

I hope the parliamentary debate focuses on how to deal with similar situations in future to avoid fiasco. Vijay M. Deshpande Corporate Advisor, Strategic Management Initiative, Pune November 27, 2009 Scroll down for my other blogs Or visit www.strami.com