There has been no change in the situation for nearly a decade, because the construction work away from the site (the 'pre-fabrication' of a Ram temple) was first begun in 1990. There is nothing illegal about that and, as I have said in Parliament, our stand on the issue is exactly the same as that of the previous governments ... We have said that the status quo will be maintained as that is the court's directive. Also, we have dropped the Ram mandir from the national agenda for governance, therefore, there should be no doubts. So where does the question of legislation by the government (to overturn a possible adverse verdict) for a Ram temple arise?

[This contradicts BJP spokesperson K.L. Sharma's assertion at a press conference in Delhi on June 15 that the BJP-led Central Govt. would like to "legislate to nullify an adverse (to the BJP-VHP view and in favour of the disputed site being handed over to the party pleading for the restoration of the Babari Masjid) verdict". Sharma added, "Parliament has a right to legislate even after a court verdict", giving the example of the Shah Bano case in which the apex court ruling was nullified by the Rajiv Gandhi Govt. through legislation. He said the BJP-led government would "see how it could be done "when asked how such legislation could be pushed through Parliament given the Govet'.s fragile majority. Outlook]. (Source: The Outlook, 29 June, 1998)