Ayodhya mediation: Double Sri’s selection by Supreme Court raises eyebrows

The appointment of spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar as one of the three mediators by the Supreme Court to resolve the Ayodhya dispute, has raised many eyebrows.

Recalling his controversial remarks that “Muslims should give up their claims on Ayodhya as good will gesture”, many Twitter users have expressed reservations about the apex court’s choice.

“After the appointment of Sri Sri on the Ayodhya mediation panel, we can expect Babu Bajrangi on a committee to prevent communal riots,” Siddharth Bhatia, founder of The Wire, remarked.

In march last year, in his interview with India Today, Sri Sri had invoked the Syrian civil war to say that Muslims should “give up” their claims on the disputed site at Ayodhya.

“It’s absurd that people are ok with foregoing masjid land for a hospital, but not for the temple. You can't say from a drawing room that you will build a hospital there. This is a question of faith of crores or people… you can't attack it,” he was quoted as saying by India Today.

Similarly, in an open letter to the All India Muslim Personal Law Board in 2018, he had listed out his opinions on possible verdicts by the Supreme Court on the vexed issue and their supposed implications.

Hindus get the land and build a temple: “In this scenario, Muslims would have serious apprehensions about our legal system and their faith in the Indian judiciary may be shaken. This could also lead to Muslim youth taking to violence as one of the many repercussions.”

Muslims are given the land to reconstruct the Babri Masjid: “This would cause huge communal disturbances all over the country. In their victory however, the Muslims will lose out on the good will and trust of millions of Hindus right from the villages up.”

The Supreme Court upholds the Allahabad High Court verdict, dividing the land between claimants: “We are giving a chance for a repeat of the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition situation and will be a continuous point of conflict. This is no solution at all.”

The government bypasses the verdict, regardless of what it is, and passes a law for a temple to be built: “In this case again, the Muslim community will feel they have lost.”

“In all the four options whether through the court or through the government, the result will be devastating for the nation at large and the Muslim Community, in particular,” he wrote in his letter.

However, Sri Sri’s intervention for an out of the court settlement didn’t go down well with All India Akhara Parishad. Its president Narendra Giri had told media that “Sri Sri is enacting a drama; he can keep doing it but it won't make any difference.”

VHP leader, Ram Vilas Vedanti, also former BJP parliamentarian, had accused Ravi Shankar of “trying to appease the government to protect his black money”.

On Friday, Sri Sri spelt out his goals in tweets, saying that the court’s “move towards mediation is in the best interest of the country and all parties concerned”.

“We should not leave any stone unturned in resolving this burning issue amicably. Respecting everyone, turning dreams to reality, ending long-standing conflicts happily and maintaining harmony in society. We must all move together towards these goals,” he added.

Earlier, a five-judge Constitution Bench comprising justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer and headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said the mediation proceedings will be held at Faizabad in Uttar Pradesh and directed the state government to make necessary arrangements for it. The Court has given the mediation committee a time frame of eight weeks to talk to the parties to the Ayodhya dispute.

Hours after the Supreme Court appointed three mediators including Justice (Retd) FM Kalifulla and senior advocate Sriram Panchu in the Ayodhya dispute, advocate Panchu told the National Herald, “It is a very serious responsibility given to me by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”

“I will do my best,” he added.

The sixty-nine-year old advocate is also founder of The Mediation Chambers, India's first court-annexed mediation centre in 2005, however, declined to comment on appointment of Sri Sri as Ayodhya mediator.

In the past he played a key role in making mediation a part of India's legal system. He has also written several books on mediation. The top court had referred to him as an “eminent trainer”’ and “one of the foremost mediators in the country”.

Incidentally, all the three mediators appointed by the Supreme Court to resolve the Ayodhya dispute belong to Tamil Nadu.