THE decision of the lawyers’ organisation in Ayodhya to refrain from appearing for the accused in the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Temple Trust embezzlement case, may not have a legal sanction, all right, but it does reflect the overall national mood -- of anger and disgust against the wrongdoers whose stealth has caused much spiritual trauma to the common people. When some criminal elements indulge in the mockery of public sentiment, the common people feel insulted and even cheated.

 

The lawyers, too, felt similarly -- which reflects clearly in their collective professional decision. Those lawyers would not appear for the accused in Ram Temple embezzlement case. Of course, the law states clearly that every accused has a right to be represented in the court of law for his defence. In case there is no lawyer willing to represent certain accused for whatever reason, then the court directs some or the other lawyer to take up the case and give the accused the necessary legal support. Constitutionally, it is the basic right of every accused to get an appropriate legal representation when court proceedings begin. As per this norm, even rape and murder accused get legal representation. Even those who happen to launch a terror attack on Parliament, also, get legal representation. On this count, thus, the law is more than clear. The Ayodhya embezzlement case, however, is of an altogether different nature. It involves religious sentiment and sensitivity of millions of Indian people following the Hindu faith. So, when the embezzlement came to light, the average Hindu citizen felt a surge of anger and disgust towards those who had the barbaric instincts to indulge in pilferage of the donations at the Ayodhya temple -- which has come to be recognised the world over as a symbol of Hindu resurgence.

 

The Hindu community had put up a long fight of cumulative five hundred-plus years finally to get the right to the Ayodhya property back from the usurpers. The Shri Ram Temple was built with much effort and out of the money contributed by countless millions of Hindu people. Most of those people placed a blind faith in the people who collected the donations and managed the huge amounts of money. There was no question of any doubt, whatsoever, about the integrity of anybody involved in the management team at the Ayodhya temple. Because people placed such a blind faith in the people who handled the donations on a daily basis, they felt terribly upset when the embezzlement came to light. That anger assumed the form of the lawyers’ boycott of the accused by the lawyer-community. Every lawyer -- whether in Ayodhya or elsewhere -- knows that every accused has a right to get represented by a lawyer. Despite that, the Ayodhya lawyers made a historic decision to refrain from representing the accused. Eventually, the courts may direct some lawyers to take up the cases. In that case, the lawyers may have to accept the court’s direction and take up the case of the accused in the Ayodhya Ram temple embezzlement case. This case, however, symbolises a complex process in which the popular mood the country is clearly well defined.

 

This brings us to insisting upon strict, no-nonsense process to be followed so that no guilty is ever spared from the strong hand of the law -- legal and moral. We also urge the appropriate levels of political and legal authorities to ensure that no unnecessary delays afflict the Ram Temple embezzlement case. This case needs to be sorted out in the most urgent manner, justice be done -- by punishing the guilty -- at the earliest moment. For, what is involved in the nation’s religious susceptibilities (which cannot be take lightly). The whole process will have to be absolutely foolproof so that nobody gets an opportunity to escape the law through some sly tricks and patronage of the mighty in the society. In this case, the nation would tolerate no nonsense in any manner whatsoever.