Rama Setu: Who runs Union of India?

Nariman? Who approved the falseaffidavit submitted to SC?

This is yet another instance of the scandalous state of the union ofIndia led by UPA government. Did Hon'ble PM approve the affidavit? Howcome the Congresss claims that they were not aware of the claims madin the affidavit? Who is in charge? Nariman? Given the state ofdeterioration in ethical values in the government functionaries, thisreport is not a surprise. The people of the nation will decide whenthe date of reckoning comes. I think SC should take exception to theway the Court is being treated – in utter contempt -- in responding tocases in the highest court of the land.

Kalyanaraman

Congress in the dark on latest Ram Sethu affidavit in court

The submission filed in the apex court states, among other things,that Ram himself destroyed the Ram SethuK.P. Narayana Kumar and Malathi Nayak -- Livemint.com Oct. 21, 2008New Delhi: The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance, or UPA, hasagain been blindsided, with the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)representative in the Union cabinet, T.R. Baalu, failing to informeither the Union cabinet or the coordinator for the legal defence ofthe government in the controversial Sethusamudram project, prior tofiling a crucial affidavit in the Supreme Court.The submission, among other things, states that the Ram Sethu wasdestroyed by Ram himself, and that it was not proved by thepetitioners that the structure was integral to Hinduism.Controversial topic: A Nasa photo of the Ram Sethu. Many Hindusbelieve the god-king, Ram, built this bridge to rescue his wife, Sita,from the clutches of demon-king Ravana. Others say it is a coralwalkway.It is a politically explosive argument with elections for six statesin the next three months announced, including in four north Indianstates where the Bharatiya Janata Party, or BJP, has significantstrength. The BJP has consistently opposed the project, using it toscore political points.The filing, while in line with the DMK's own position on the issue,could quickly emerge as a political problem for the Congress party,which is already being subjected to the charge that it is soft onminorities at the expense of India's Hindu majority.The Sethusamudram project began in 2004 and proposed to create ashipping channel by dredging a walkway connecting India and Sri Lanka.Many Hindus believe the god-king, Ram, built this bridge with an armyof monkeys to rescue his wife, Sita, from the clutches of demon-kingRavana. Others say it is a coral walkway.A senior minister in the UPA government, who was tasked withcoordinating the legal challenge on the channel project but didn'twant to be named, concedes: "I do not know how or why that submissionwas filed before the court. I am yet to see the document. This was notdiscussed during cabinet meetings either."When the case proceedings ended on 30 July, the court, while reservingjudgment, had asked the parties to submit written arguments, includingnew contentions.The written document submitted by the government on 14 October isdubbed a "Brief written Note by Counsel for the Union of Indiasubmitted after the close of oral arguments on 30 July 2008". It hasexcerpts from religious texts including the Kamba Ramayanam and PadmaPurana.The document states that "it has not been proved (by the petitioners)undoubtedly to the belief of the Hindu community—that Lord did nothimself break the bridge". Quoting the religious texts, it argued thatthe "petitioners have not alleged much less proved that Rama Sethuforms an integral part of the Hindu religion".Moreover, it describes the petitions as "politically motivated" andgoes on to say that the pleas of the petitioners smack of "a lack ofbona fide".An officer in the culture ministry, who is in charge of the departmentthat deals with the channel project, also said they weren't consultednor were they informed after the submission by the shipping and roadtransport ministry."I read about the submission in the next day's papers. We were notinformed," said this officer who, too, didn't want to be named.Another senior official, who is in the shipping and road transportministry and similarly didn't want his name used, said "the ministerhas been directly dealing with the matter himself", indicating thateven relevant ministry officials were not briefed about the filing ofthe submission.Calls to Baalu's office weren't returned. Fali S. Nariman, thegovernment counsel on the case, too, was unavailable for comment.Additional solicitor general R. Mohan, who was handling the shippingministry's brief, declined to comment.Commentator Cho Ramaswamy says Baalu and Tamil Nadu chief minister M.Karunandhi's family are very keen on the Sethusamudram projectproceeding. "However, this (the Sethusamudram controversy) is not anissue that will benefit any political party when it comes to theelections," he added.DMK spokesperson Ilangovan, who uses only one name, said: "We willinvoke Sethusamudram during the polls to highlight how the BJP hasdeprived the benefits of such a good project to Tamil Nadu." Herefused to comment further.On his part, Arun Kumar, a Congress party secretary who is in chargeof the Tamil Nadu unit, said he will study the affidavit in detailbefore reacting to it.BJP spokesman Prakash Javadekar said: "The government is not onlyindulging in interpreting religion but is also giving a new twist toRam katha itself. In the first affidavit, the government said there isno proof of Ram's existence. Then there was widespread anger and itwithdrew the affidavit. In the next one, it said it was a matter offaith and was up to the court to decide. Now they are saying that Ramhimself destroyed the Ram Sethu, which means they are admitting thatRam existed."The government on 30 July told the court it would set up a committeeheaded by R.K. Pachauri, director general of The Energy and ResoursesInstitute, to look at an alternative route for the project, one thatpossibly doesn't cut across the Ram Sethu. The committee was meant toexamine alternative routes and submit a report before the court. Thereport is yet to be submitted.Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy, the chief petitioner in thecase related to the Sethusamudram project, moved the Supreme Court onThursday challenging the submissions made by the Centre. The court haspermitted him to file submissions to rebut the Centre's new arguments."The Centre has made some new points almost two and a half monthsafter the court reserved its judgement," said Swamy. "It is quiteclear that the written submissions were filed primarily to intimidateand influence the Pachauri committee which consists of governmentofficials."

narayana.k@livemint.com

Krisnamurthy Ramasubbu and Liz Mathew contributed to this story

.http://www.livemint.com/Articles/PrintArticle.aspx