AIPPM

BACKGROUND GUIDE
AGENDA
BABRI MAZJID OR RAM MANDIR
AN UNDECIDED ISSUE?
Your EB
Rabya Nautiyal-Director

Mukul Acharya-Chairperson

Note from the Executive Board

Dear Delegates, Congratulations on getting the opportunity to participate in The
SFS MUN 2017.

To the veterans of MUN, we promise you a very enriching debate that youve
never experienced before and to the newcomers, we are really excited to be a part
of your maiden voyage.
What we desire from the delegates is not how experienced or articulate they are.
Rather, we want to see how she/he can respect disparities and differences of
opinion, work around these, while extending their own foreign policy so that it
encompasses more of the others without compromising their own stand, thereby
reaching a unanimously acceptable practical solution.
The following pages intend to guide you with the nuances of the agenda as well as
the Council. The Guide chronologically touches upon all the different aspects that
are relevant and will lead to fruitful debate in the Council. It will provide you with
a birds eye view of the gist of the issue. However, it has to be noted that the
background guide only contains certain basic information which may form the
basis for the debate and your research. You are the representative of your allotted
country and it is our hope that you put in wholehearted efforts to research and
comprehensively grasp all important facets of the diverse agenda.
All the delegates should be prepared well in order to make the councils direction
and debate productive. We encourage you to go beyond this background guide and
delve into the extremities of the agenda to further enhance your knowledge of a
burning global issue.
For any further queries contact:
Mukul Acharya-Chairperson
Rabya Nautiyal-Director

Validity of Reports:
Delegates please keep the validity of reports in mind while researching as we
would be following the below structure very strictly in committee.

Valid and Binding:

1. All reports published by the United Nations and its agencies.
2. Reuters
3. Amnesty International

Not accepted under any condition:

1. Wikipedia
2. Wiki Leaks
3. Blog Articles
4. The Background Guide itself

INTRODUCTION:
The Ayodhya dispute is a political, historical and socio-religious debate
in India, centered on a plot of land in the city of Ayodhya, located
in Faizabad district, Uttar Pradesh. The main issues revolve around access
to a site traditionally regarded among Hindus to be the birthplace of the
Hindu deity Rama, the history and location of the Babri Mosque at the site,
and whether a previous Hindu temple was demolished or modified to create
the mosque.
The Babri Mosque was destroyed during a political rally which turned into a
riot on 6 December 1992. A subsequent land title case was lodged in
the Allahabad High Court, the verdict of which was pronounced on 30
September 2010. In the landmark hearing, the three judges of The

Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres (1.12 ha) of Ayodhya land
be divided into 3 parts, with 1/3 going to the Ram Lalla or Infant Rama
represented by the Hindu Maha Sabha for the construction of the Ram
temple, 1/3 going to the Islamic Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining 1/3
going to a Hindu religious denomination Nirmohi Akhara. While the three-
judge bench was not unanimous that the disputed structure was
constructed after demolition of a temple, it did agree that a temple or a
temple structure predated the mosque at the same site. The excavations by
the Archaeological Survey of India were heavily used as evidence by the
court that the predating structure was a massive Hindu religious building.

Religious background
Ram Janmabhoomi

The Ayodhya debate centres around the land known today as Ram
Janmabhoomi, on which the Babri Mosque was built in 1528. In
the Ramayana, Ayodhya is the birthplace of the god-king Rama, the son
of Dasharatha, the ruler of Ayodhya, and his queen Kausalya. He is
worshiped by many Hindus as an Avatar, or incarnation, of Vishnu.
According to the Garuda Purana, a Hindu religious text, Ayodhya is one of
seven sacred sites where Moksha, or a final release from the cycle of death
[3]
and rebirth, may be obtained.

Babri Masjid
In 1525, the Mughal king Babur invaded north India, and conquered a
substantial part of northern India. One of his generals, Mir Baqi came
[4]
to Ayodhya in 1528 and after reportedly destroying a pre-existing temple
of Rama at the site, built a mosque, which has come to be called masjid-i-
janmasthan (mosque at the birthplace)] as well as Babri Masjid(Babur's
mosque). The Babri Mosque was one of the largest mosques in Uttar
Pradesh, a state in India with considerable Muslim population. Both the
Hindus and Muslims are said to have worshipped at the "mosque-temple,"
Muslims inside the mosque and Hindus outside the mosque but inside the
compound. After the British took over the State, they put up a railing
between the two areas to prevent disputes

Title cases

In 1950, Gopal Singh Visharad filed a title suit with the Allahabad High
Court seeking injunction to offer 'puja' (worship) at the disputed site. A
similar suit was filed shortly after but later withdrawn by Paramhans Das of
]
Ayodhya. In 1959, the Nirmohi Akhara, a Hindu religious institution, filed a
third title suit seeking direction to hand over the charge of the disputed site,
claiming to be its custodian. A fourth suit was filed by the Muslim Central
Board of Wakf for declaration and possession of the site. The Allahabad
high court bench began hearing the case in 2002, which was completed in
2010. However, the bench withheld its verdict till 24 September. After
the Supreme Court dismissed a plea to defer the High Court verdict, the
High Court set 30 September 2010 as the final date for pronouncing the
judgment.
On 30 September 2010, the High Court of Allahabad, the three-member
bench comprising justices S. U. Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D. V. Sharma,
ruled that the disputed land be split into three parts. The site of the Ramlala
idol would go to the party representing Ram Lalla Virajman (the installed
Infant Ram deity), Nirmohi Akhara to get Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabutara,
and the Sunni Wakf Board to get the rest. The court also ruled that the
status quo should be maintained for three months.
Reacting to the verdict, all the three parties announced that they would

appeal against the division of disputed land in the Supreme Court of

India. All the three parties, however, conceded that this judgment was an
important step towards the resolution of a long-standing dispute.

Timeline
Year Date Event[74][75]

During the reign of Babur, the first Mughal emperor,

152 some have claimed that an old Hindu temple was
7 demolished, and a mosque constructed at the same
place in Ayodhya and named after Babur.

185 The first recorded communal clashes over the site

3 date to this year.

The colonial British administration put a fence around

185 the site, denominating separate areas of worship for
9 Hindus and Muslims. That is how it stood for about 90
years.

Idols were placed inside the mosque. Both sides to the

dispute filed civil suits. The government locked the
194
December gates, saying the matter was sub judice and declared
9
the area disputed. The civil suits were filed for
ownership of the Plot no 583 of the area.

196 Case filed in Indian courts against forceful occupation

1 of the Babri Mosque and placing of idols within it.

The movement to build a temple at the site, which

Hindus claimed was the birthplace of Lord Ram,
198
gathered momentum when Hindu groups formed a
4
committee to spearhead the construction of a temple
at the Ramjanmabhoomi site.

A district judge ordered the gates of the mosque to be

 opened after almost five decades and allowed Hindus
to worship inside the disputed structure. A Babri
198
Mosque Action Committee was formed as Muslims
6
protested the move to allow Hindu prayers at the site.
The gates were opened in less than an hour after the
court decision.

The clamour for building a Ram temple was growing.

In February, VHP proclaimed that a Shila or a stone
will be established for construction of temple near the
area. In November, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad laid
198 foundations of a temple on land adjacent to the
9 "disputed structure" in presence of Home Minister Sh
Boota Singh and then Chief Minister Sh ND Tiwari.
There were sporadic clashes in the country such as
Bhagalpur in Bihar.

Sh V P Singh became the Prime Minister of India with

support of BJP which had won 58 seats in the election,
a massive improvement from its last tally of 2 seats.
The then BJP president Lal Krishna Advani took out a
cross-country rathyatra to garner support for the move
to build a Ram temple at the site. On 23 October was
arrested in Bihar during the yatra, following which BJP
199
took back its support to the government. Sh
0
Chandrashekhar became the Prime Minister of India
with support of the congress. On October 30, many
were gunned down by the police on orders of the then
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav,
when they gathered in Ayodhya as participants of the
Rath-Yatra; their bodies were thrown in the river
Saryu.[76][77][78][79]

Congress came to power at center after elections in

1991, while BJP became major opposition party in
center and came to power in many states such as
Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh and
Uttar Pradesh. Kalyan Singh became the Chief
Minister of Uttar Pradesh. State government acquired
199
2.77 acre land in the area and gave it on lease to
1
RamJanmBhoomi Nyas Trust. The Allahbad High
Court stopped any permanent construction activity in
the area. Kalyan Singh publicly supported the
movement while Central Government took no action to
curb the increasing tensions. In spite of the High Court
judgement, disputed area was leveled.

Kalyan Singh took steps to support the movement

such as making entry into area easier, promising no
firing on Karsevaks, opposing decision of central
 government to send Central Police force in the area,
etc. In July, several thousand Karsevaks assembled in
the area and the work for maintenance of temple
started. This activity was stopped after intervention of
the prime minister. Meetings started between Babri
Masjid Action Committee and VHP leaders in
presence of the home minister. On 30 October,
199 Dharam Sansad of VHP proclaimed in Delhi that the
2 talks have failed and Karseva will presume from 6

December. Central Government was considering the

deployment of central police forces in the area and
dissolution of state government but in the end decided
against it. The case was being heard in the Supreme
Court which told that State Government is responsible
for ensuring law and order in the area. The
government was discussing it in Cabinet Committee
meeting and Rashtriya Ekta Parishad. BJP boycotted
the Parishad. The Allahabad High Court was hearing
the matter of legality of structure of foundation laid in
1989.

The Babri Mosque was demolished by a gathering of

199 6
near 200,000 Karsevaks. Communal riots across India
2 December
followed.

Ten days after the demolition, the Congress

199 16 government at the Centre, headed by PV Narasimha
2 December Rao, set up a commission of inquiry under Justice
Liberhan.

Three months after being constituted, the Liberhan

199
Commission began investigations into who and what
3
led to the demolition of the Babri Mosque.

Tensions rose on the anniversary of the demolition of

200
the mosque as the VHP reaffirmed its resolve to build
1
a temple at the site.

At least 58 people were killed in Godhra, Gujarat, in

an attack on a train believed to be carrying Hindu
200 27
volunteers from Ayodhya. Riots followed in the state
2 February
and over 2000 people were unofficially reported to
have died in these.

The court ordered a survey to find out whether a

200 temple to Lord Ram existed on the site. In August, the
3 survey presented evidence of a temple under the
mosque. Muslim groups disputed the findings.
 A court ruled that seven Hindu leaders, including some
200
September prominent BJP leaders, should stand trial for inciting
3
the destruction of the Babri Mosque.

An Uttar Pradesh court ruled that an earlier order

200 which exonerated LK Advani for his role in the
November
4 destruction of the mosque should be reviewed.

200 The Supreme Court refused to admit a review

7 petition on the Ayodhya dispute.

The Liberhan Commission, which was instituted ten

days after the demolition of the Babri Mosque in 1992,
200
submitted its report on 30 June almost 17 years
9
after it began its inquiry. Its contents were not made
public.

The Allahabad High Court pronounces its verdict on

four title suits relating to the Ayodhya dispute on 30
201 30 September 2010. Ayodhya land to be divided into
0 September three parts. 1/3 goes to Ram Lalla represented
by Hindu Maha Sabha, 1/3 to Sunni Wakf Board, 1/3
goes to Nirmohi Akhara.[80]

The Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha and Sunni

201
December Waqf Board moved to the Supreme Court of India,
0 challenging part of the Allahabad High Courts verdict.
[81][82]

Supreme Court of India stayed the High Court order

splitting the disputed site in three parts and said that
2011 9 May status quo will remain. The two judge bench of
Supreme Court remarked that the High Court was
surprising as no party wanted a split of the site.