“As you are aware, the Babari Masjid Movement Coordination Committee (BMMCC) was invited by the Government to place its view before the Committee of the Chief Ministers, appointed by you to explore the possibility of a negotiated settlement of the Ayodhya dispute, on 4 December, 1990 but for lack of time, the meeting did not take place, although Shri Sudh Kant, Minister of State for Home Affairs, was kind enough to brief us about the progress of the talks of the Committee with the AIMBAC and the VHP, on the same day.

Subsequently the Minister of State for Home Affairs was kind enough to send us the papers submitted by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad for our information.

On 5 December, 1990, you had indicated to us that the Committee of Chief Ministers shall invite the Babari Masjid Movement Coordination Committee for talks in due course. However, the Committee has not so far established any contact with us.

The BMMCC would like to place on record that it includes the representatives of the Indian Union Muslim League, the J & K National Conference, the All India Muslim Majlis, the Insaf Party and the Jamaat-e-Islami-Hind. The BMMCC enjoys fully the support of the apex body of the Muslim community, the All India Muslim Majis-e-Mushawarat. It was formed by the All India Babari Masjid Conference held in New Delhi in December, 1986. The All India Babari Masjid Action Committee (AIBMAC) represents a dissent faction which separated from the Babari Masjid Movement Coordination Committee in December, 1988 and includes elements who do not command the confidence of Muslim community, as they are known to have favoured a compromise on the integrity and sanctity of the Babari Masjid. The BMMCC, therefore, finds it strange that the Government appears to rely wholly on the AIB-MAC in finding a solution.

The BMMCC deems it equally strange that the Vishwa Hindu Parishad which is challenging the rule of law and the authority of the judiciary to settle a question of fact, namely, the title to the disputed premises, which has launched a violent agitation to force the state to hand over the disputed premises in violation of the statusquo order of the High Court and which has tried to sow disaffection among the security forces and hatred among the people should be treated on par with the other side committing itself to the judicial process and peacefully defending its rights through legal and constitutional means.

Reiterates its stand that there can be no negotiation with the VHP under duress as negotiations and agitation cannot go on at the same time.

The BMMCC is of the view that the negotiation between the VHP and the AIBMAC constitutes an exercise in futility and cannot lead to a just and amicable settlement of the dispute.

The BMMCC also fails to understand the objective and the role of the Government in the exercise, because the Executive cannot substitute for the Judiciary and the Government Cannot function as a Court or as a Tribunal or as a Commission of Inquiry.

The BMMCC is of the considered view that the object of negotiations should be confined to define an area of agreement which serve as the basis for a via media on the basis of give-and-take which would safeguard the vital and essential interests of both the parties and that negotiations cannot be stretched to a quasi-judicial process of lining up evidence and assessing their relevance and comparative weight, leading to an award or a finding by the Government. Negotiation is neither mediation nor arbitration.

The BMMCC, while nursing deep reservation on the purpose and procedure of the negotiation, had however, decided to watch the development and has now come to the conclusion that the negotiations have not revealed any common ground to serve as a basis for the solution of the dispute and, that no honourable solution is possible under the procedure adopted. The BMMCC views with concern the formation of expert Committees to go into various categories of ‘evidence’ and aspects of the problem, which substantially changes the picture and reveals the danger implicit in the procedure. The BMMCC is of the firm view that this step is injurious to the interest of the Muslim community as it is calculated to erode the Muslim case, to undermine and bypass the judicial process, to substitute a political award for a judicial verdict, and to build up slowly a public opinion in favour of a political award with the help of sympathetic elements of the mass media.

The Committee of Chief Ministers thus appears to be preparing the ground for the abandonment of the Masjid by the Government in the face of violence and for its eventual surrender to the VHP for demolition by building up climate of public opinion based on ‘expert advice’ that the VHP case is strong and, therefore, the Government is unable to use it coercive power to protect and defend the Masjid or wait for a judicial determination.

The BMMCC also recalls your repeated statements that the dispute can be resolved through negotiations between religious leaders of the two communities. To the best of our knowledge, no Muslim religious leader of any consequence has been invited so far by the Government, individually or collectively, for an exchange of views nor has the Government resumed the negotiations between the religious leaders of the two communities, initiated in October, 1990.

The BMMCC, therefore, demands that since the VHP has already rejected the evidence submitted by the AIBMCC and threatened to launch yet another agitation - Kar Seva III - for the construction of the proposed Mandir in accordance with its original site-plan, without title to the site and without the approval of the site-plan by the competent authority, the negotiations should be terminated forthwith and:

"1. The hearing of the title suit by the Special Bench of the Allahabad High Court should be expedited;

2. An unambiguous declaration of interest should be made by the Central and State Governments that the disputed premises shall be defended and protected by the Government against any trespass in any form by the VHP in accordance with the stay order of the High Court, and the final judicial verdict shall be enforced by the State, at all costs.

3. Central legislation should be immediately enacted to protect the religious status of all places of worship as on 15 August 1947.

While reiterating its commitment to the rule of law and the judicial process, the BMMCC cautions the Government once again, with all the emphasis at its command, against preparing the ground for the surrender of the Babari Masjid to the VHP and for its demolition, by abdicating its responsibility to protect the Masjid and by imposing a political award on the Muslim community, which

compromises the integrity and sanctity of the Masjid and fails to restore the Masjid to the Muslim community."

New Delhi, 15 January 1991