Modi's two-day South Korea visit: Of Ayodhya, peace and investments

Few nations other than South Korea have helped Modi shape a domestic narrative alongside deepening bilateral ties.

Business Standard : As Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi starts his two-day visit to South Korea for a second bilateral summit in less than a year, there is a lot on his and India’s agenda. Tomorrow, Modi will be conferred the prestigious Seoul Peace Prize 2018 for his contribution to global growth, human development and international cooperation. Modi joins the league of world leaders like Angela Merkel, Kofi Annan, Ban Ki Moon and Vaclav Havel as recipients of the prize, started in 1990.

Much of the action on the negotiations front will take place tomorrow, when Modi takes forward the agenda set during South Korean President Moon Jae-In’s state visit to India in July 2018. India and South Korea had inked 11 memoranda of understandings (MoUs) during President Moon’s last visit – nine of which related to deepening trade relations, cooperation in the fields of technology, science, telecommunications, infrastructure and boosting investments.

The opening of the world’s largest mobile phone manufacturing factory in Noida by South Korea’s largest chaebol Samsung last year enhanced that nation’s profile in India, but there is still a long way to go in order to boost trade and investment between New Delhi and Seoul.

Trade between the two nations stood at around $21 billion in 2017-18, comprising 2.7 per cent of India’s global trade. While India’s exports to South Korea stood at $4.5 billion, its imports were a little over $16 billion. India’s imports from South Korea have increased 21 per cent since the Modi government came to power in 2014-15, while its exports have declined three per cent.

More than half of all Indian exports to South Korea comprised mineral fuels, aluminium, iron, steel and organic chemicals. India’s largest import from South Korea was electronics worth $2.7 billion in 2017-18. Other significant imports include manufacturing equipment, plastics, iron, steel and semi-precious stones. Trade with India also comprises a small portion of South Korea’s global annual trade, estimated by the Wold Trade Organization (WTO) at over $1 trillion.

South Korea, the world’s 11th-largest economy with a gross domestic product (GDP) of $1.6 trillion, is also a small contributor to foreign direct investment (FDI) into India. During the period from April 2000 to December 2018, South Korea has accounted for less than one per cent of all FDI equity flows into India. In 2017-18, FDI from South Korea stood at $293 million – having doubled since the Modi government came to power in 2014-15.

Start Ram temple construction now to complete by 2025, says Bhaiyyaji Joshi

The Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case has been pending before the apex court for last eight years.

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has asserted that the construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya should begin now so that it can be completed by 2025.

"We strongly want that this temple should be built in Ayodhya. It should be completed by 2025. Now, it is up to the central government to take a decision on it. If it begins today, construction will be completed in five years," RSS general secretary Bhaiyyaji Joshi told media on Friday.

The Babri Masjid, built by Mughal emperor Babur in 1578 in Ayodhya was pulled down on December 6, 1992, allegedly by a group of Hindu activists, claiming that the mosque was constructed after demolishing a Ram temple that originally stood there. Since then, several hearings have been held in the Supreme Court to resolve the issue.

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court in its September 30, 2010, verdict ordered that the disputed site be divided into three parts -- one for deity (Ramlala Virajmaan), another for Nirmohi Akhara - a Hindu sect - and a third one, to the original litigant in the case for the Muslims.

The Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case has been pending before the apex court for last eight years. Parties in the case and various right-wing organisations have been asking for an early or day-to-day hearing for a long time.

There are as many as 14 appeals pending in the top court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement, delivered in four civil suits.

The Supreme Court recently fixed January 29 as the next date of hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute after Justice UU Lalit recused himself from hearing the case.

Article Source BS

Ayodhya case: A timeline of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court will hear the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land title dispute case today. Here is a timeline of the case and various key developments in the story so far.

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has begun hearing the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land title dispute case today. Let's take a look at the various important developmennts in the case over the decades leading up to today.

Dome to doom

1528: Mughal emperor Babur constructs a mosque and it is named Babri

December 23, 1949: Lord Ram's idols are planted inside the central dome. Both sides file court cases; the site is locked

December 17, 1959: The Nirmohi Akhara files a suit seeking possession of the site and claims to be the custodians of the disputed land

ALSO READ: Ayodhya LIVE: SC says no hearing today, only date & schedule to be decided

December 18, 1961: The Sunni Central Board of Waqf files a suit claiming ownership of the site

1984: Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) launches a campaign for the construction of the Ram temple at the Janmabhoomi site

February 1, 1986: Faizabad district court orders the gates of the mosque be opened and Hindus be allowed to worship there. Muslims protest the move and forms Babri Mosque Action Committee

November 9, 1989: VHP lays the foundation of a Ram temple on land next to the Babri Masjid following permission from the then Rajiv Gandhi government

September 25, 1990: Then BJP President L K Advani launches his Rath Yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya. He is arrested in Bihar’s Samastipur in November

December 6, 1992: The disputed Babri Mosque is razed to the ground by karsevaks

April 2002: Three-judge Bench of high court begins hearing to determine the ownership of land. The HC orders the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to excavate the site to determine if it was a temple earlier.

2003: ASI finds evidence of the presence of a temple under the mosque. Muslim organisations dispute the findings

September 30, 2010: The HC rules the disputed land be divided into three parts — one-third to Ram Lalla Virajman, represented by the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha; one-third to the Sunni Waqf Board; and the remaining to the Nirmohi Akhara. In December, the parties move the SC

Business Standard

SC to hear Ayodhya title dispute case today: Everything you need to know

How did the Ayodhya land dispute case get to where it is?

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the Ayodhya title suit regarding the Babri masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi land dispute would be heard by a five-judge Constitution bench on January 10 (Thursday).

The bench will be led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, with the other four judges being Justices S.A. Bobde, N.V. Ramana, U.U. Lalit and D Y Chandrachud.

The Supreme Court began hearing the case in December 2017, when the Allahabad high court decision to split the land three ways was appealed.

In the last week of September 2018, the Supreme Court refused to refer to a five-judge Constitution bench a 24-year-old case – the Ismail Faruqui judgment – that said offering prayers in a mosque is not an “essential feature” of Islam. Justice Ashok Bhushan authored the majority judgment, for himself and then Chief Justice Dipak Misra. Justice S.A. Nazeer was the dissenting judge.

The Muslim litigants had requested that the judgment be reopened because the litigants felt it might have an adverse bearing on their claim to the land in question.

ALSO READ: Supreme Court sets up five-judge bench to hear Ayodhya land dispute case

While refusing to list the matter before a constitution bench, the Supreme Court said the civil suit will be decided on the basis of evidence and that the previous verdict does not have any relevance.

What the Ismail Faruqui judgment of 1994 was about

The petitioner, Ismail Faruqui, challenged the validity of the Acquisition of Certain Area At Ayodhya Act, 1993, under which 67.703 acres were acquired in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid complex in Ayodhya.

The Supreme Court held that “any step taken to arrest escalation of communal tension” can “by no stretch of argumentation, be termed non-secular”.

Business Standar

Modi should stop doing 'political drama': Sena on Ayodhya Ram Temple issue

Contrary to the BJP's claims, it is not the Congress, but a 'lack of political will' that is the biggest hurdle.

The Shiv Sena Monday charged that "lack of political will" was delaying construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya and said Prime Minister Narendra Modi should stop doing "political nautanki" (drama) over the issue while keeping a gun on shoulders of the Congress.

Taking potshots at Modi for his "56-inch chest" remark made during the 2014 Lok Sabha polls, it said the Congress did not have the courage to build the Ram Temple, so it was thrown out of power, and a man with a "56-inch chest" was given the keys to the administration.

"Yet, if you see the Congress in water, on land and in air, people will once again have to measure your chest size. If Ram continues to stay in 'vanvaas' (exile) then stop your political 'nautanki'," the Sena said in an editorial in party mouthpiece 'Saamana'.

During the 2014 Lok Sabha poll campaign, Modi had said that a "56-inch chest" was needed to tackle Pakistan.

On the prime minister's charge that the Congress was creating hurdles in the court's process, the Sena said, "Narendra Modi has to stop levelling allegations against the Gandhi family and the Congress. You were not given power to keep cribbing about such problems. The Congress and the Samajwadi Party were ousted because of their hurdles in the construction of Ram Temple. So, stop blaming the Congress now".

"Did demonetisation not happen despite opposition from the Congress? Did you not form government in Jammu and Kashmir with (People's Democratic Party chief) Mehbooba Mufti despite hurdles from the Congress? Then what is the hurdle in (construction of) Ram temple?" it asked.

Contrary to the BJP's claims, it is not the Congress, but a "lack of political will" that is the biggest hurdle in the temple's construction, claimed the Sena, which is an ally of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) at the Centre and in Maharashtra.

"What is (Congress chief) Rahul Gandhi's importance? What strength does the Congress have? Then why give it so much importance? If you play politics on temple while keeping the gun on the Congress' shoulders, you will disappear. Ram temple was not Congress', but BJP's promise," it said.

It also said that Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray's visit to Ayodhya has fulfilled one objective - those who were sleeping over the issue did not turn but at least have opened their eyes and understood that 'jumlebaazi' (rhetoric) will not work as far as the Ram Temple is concerned.

Thackeray had offered prayers at the Ram Lalla Temple in Ayodhya on Sunday and said the BJP government at the Centre "may not last" if the temple was not constructed.

He had demanded that an ordinance be brought in to pave way for the temple's construction, warning that emotions of Hindus should not be taken for granted.

Business Standard

Shiv Sena to BJP: Why don't you declare date for construction of Ram temple

Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray is scheduled to visit Ayodhya on November 25 as part of his party's push to build a Ram temple there.

The Shiv Sena Friday asked the BJP to come out with an ordinance and declare a date for the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya.

While slamming the BJP, the Sena said those in power should be proud of Shiv Sainiks who had "destroyed Babur's raj in Ram Janmabhoomi". The Babri Masjid was built in Ayodhya n the orders of Mughal emperor Babur.

In an editorial in party mouthpiece 'Saamana', the Sena said it neither moves around with a begging bowl asking for votes in the name of Lord Ram nor does it indulge in "jumlebaazi" (rhetoric) during polls.

Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray is scheduled to visit Ayodhya on November 25 as part of his party's push to build a Ram temple there.

"Why did those, who call themselves pro-Hindutva, start getting a stomach ache when we announced our plans of going to Ayodhya? We are not going there for political purposes," the Sena said in the editorial.

It claimed the party had not given the slogan "Chalo Ayodhya", but Shiv Sainiks were going there for Lord Ram's darshan and also because Ayodhya is "nobody's private place".

"There is no Ram raj there now, but the raj of the Supreme Court. However, in 1992, Balasaheb's Shiv Sainiks had destroyed Babur's raj in Ram Janmabhoomi. Instead of being scared and jealous of such Sainiks, those in power should be proud of them," the Sena editorial claimed.

It further said that instead of casting aspersions on the motive of Sainiks going to Ayodhya, the government should declare a date for the construction of the temple and put all suspicions to rest.

"We ask you ask once again, why don't you declare a date for the construction of the Ram temple? If the issue of Ram temple goes out of your hands, in 2019, apart from your 'rozi-roti' (livelihood), many people's tongues too will become handicapped," the editorial warned.

"Instead of doing everything to stop the Sena, we ask again, why don't you come out with an ordinance and declare a date for the construction of the temple," the editorial stated.

Business Standard

Ram temple: VHP says Hindus can't wait forever for SC verdict, seeks law

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said an "appropriate bench" will decide in January next year the future course of hearing on the appeals filed against the Allahabad HC.

The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) Monday said Hindus cannot wait eternally for a court judgement on the Ayodhya land dispute case and asked the government to bring a law for building a Ram temple.

It's working president Alok Kumar urged the Narendra Modi government to bring a legislation in the Winter Session.

His remarks came soon after the Supreme Court moved the hearing on the case to January next year.

"The Supreme Court has once again adjourned the hearing. This fortifies the VHP's stand that the solution to the Ram Janambhoomi issue is not in eternally waiting for hearing of appeals pending for over seven years.

We reiterate our request to the Union government to enact a law to clear the way for building a grand temple of Lord Ram at his birthplace in Ayodhya," Kumar told PTI.

This may be done in the coming winter session of Parliament, the head of the RSS affiliate said, adding that the Hindutva organisation will intensify its campaign for such a legislation if the government does not act.

The organisation has called a two-day 'Dharam Sansad', a meeting of seers, on January 31 and February 1 next year to discuss the Ram temple issue. This will be held on the sidelines of the Kumbh Mela in Allahabad.

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said an "appropriate bench" will decide in January next year the future course of hearing on the appeals filed against the Allahabad High Court verdict in the Ayodhya land dispute case.

Business Standard