Press
Briefing Thursday, 3rd December 2009
Shri.
Abhishek Singhvi addressed the media today.
On the question of the dates of discussion over the
Liberhan Commission report in both Houses of Parliament,
Shri Singhvi said that there are indications that it
might be taken up in Lok Sabha on 7th and 8th and in
Rajya Sabha on 9th and 10th December 2009.
On a further question whether the Congress party accepts
the defence offered by Shri Narasimha Rao when the Babri
Masjid was demolished, Shri Singhvi said that he cannot
vouch for every word or page of the book. He has already
spoken about Mr. Narasimha Rao. In short, for the
convenience of the media he is repeating all those three
points which have already been made by him. Those are:
1. That if a body as careful and as scrutinizing as the
Hon’ble Supreme Court could be misled by categorical
affidavit, then certainly the whole nation including the
Central Government sitting far away and Mr. Narasimha
Rao was entitled to be misled because everybody was
totally misled. First time in the history of India, a
sitting Chief Minister had to be convicted for contempt
of court.
2. Who is saying all this – the principal core accused –
one set of core accused standing a few meters away and
the other set of core accused as the Chief Minister of
the State, people dancing with joy are blaming somebody
in Delhi at the Central Government, if there is any
guilt anywhere, there is 1000th times more in those
principal core accused.
3. As has been said earlier, we reminded you that Mr.
Narasimha Rao did not fight elections subsequent to the
date.
Shri Singhvi said that he has nothing to add or subtract
from the above three points.
On the question over the statement of the Samajwadi
party that Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh had paid
‘gurudakshina’ to m m Narasimha Rao by letting him go
free in the Liberhan Commission report, Shri Singhvi
said with due respect that it is a laughable remark and
it is as laughable allegation. He thinks it is so funny
and weird; it does not deserve a comment or reaction.
On the question whether Sheila Dixit had written any
letter to the then Prime Minister 2-3 days before the
demolition of babri masjid and Prime Minister not taking
any action does it mean that Narasimha Rao was mixed up
with RSS, Shri Singhvi said that the media should put
this question to Sheila Dixit for any clarification.
On a further question that BJP is saying that it is on
record that M.L. Fotedar had also blamed Narasimha Rao,
Shri Singhvi said that lot of people had said so and
they are entitled to their views. Media has to ask them
this question.
On another question as to the strategy of the Congress
party on the Liberhan Commission report and whether they
are going to defend Mr. Narasimha Rao, Shri Singhvi said
that there is no question of any strategy. There is a
report. The report is as it is. Neither you can change
it nor can I or anybody else change the same. If anybody
with the highest power of distortion can read or misread
that report to put the congress on the defensive, well,
then good luck to them. That is why we are having the
debate shortly. And I can see it that any reasonable or
any unreasonable person can only read the report and a
severe comprehensive indictment of a so-called major
political party which uses cheap politics for cheap gain
by dividing people.
On the question whether the Congress party apologizes,
Shri Singhvi said that there are parties in this country
who do not apologize for what terrible acts they have
done. We do apologize to the people for those shameful
acts. Shri Singhvi further said that we are going to do
anything and everything only by two routes as we have
said earlier. We do not want a remedy and a solution to
be worth a disease. The two routes we have proclaimed
are either by a definitive final court verdict which is
binding on all or by a comprehensive settlement which is
accepted by all relevant stake holders. That is a very
clear stand. We do not want solutions to be created
which may be ‘a’, ‘b’ or ‘c’ but we categorically repeat
that solution emerging out of any of those two routes
would be acceptable and desirable.
On the question of the statement of Shri Rahul Gandhi
that had any family member of Gandhi been at the helm of
affairs at that time, the babri masjid would not have
demolished, Shri Singhvi said that he was conveying his
deep anxious pain. Those who broke it down did not think
of terrible consequences physical psychological emotive
which it would lead and such parties, people and
so-called sansthas have no right to exist quite frankly
lest they eschew this path. Shri Singhvi further said
that Shri Rahul Gandhi did not name any body. He was
only expressing his anguish.
Tom Vadakkan
Secretary, AICC
