Revision as of 10:35, 18 September 2023

Rules

Reporting not allowed

Dhananjay Mahapatra, Reporting not allowed on mediation, March 9, 2019: The Times of India

Muslim outfits welcomed the SC’s attempt to resolve the row through mediation, although All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen objected to the choice of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar as one of the mediators, by pointing out that the spiritual guru favoured construction of Ram temple at the disputed site.

Though it did not specifically pass a gag order on the committee’s proceedings, the bench comprising the CJI and Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer said there should not be any reporting on the matter and “empowered” the panel to issue necessary orders. While specifying Faizabad as the venue for in-camera mediation, the court said, “Mediation proceedings should be conducted with utmost confidentiality so as to ensure its success which can only be safeguarded by directing that proceedings of mediation and the views expressed therein by any of the parties, including the mediators, shall be kept confidential and not revealed to any other person.”

The Hindu parties opposed the court’s suggestion during the two previous hearings, on February 26 and March 6, to refer the dispute for mediation. They held that such attempts were made in the past and this too would prove futile. But Muslim parties, along with Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Wakf Board, had agreed for mediation. In its 2010 verdict, the Allahabad HC had allotted the two entities one-third each of the disputed land with the other third going to deity Ram Lalla.

Aware of the likely intense media focus on the mediation process, and conscious that wide coverage of views expressed could inflame emotions detrimental to an amicable solution, the bench said, “There ought not to be any reporting of the said proceedings in print or in electronic media. However, we refrain from passing any specific order at this stage and instead empower the mediators to pass necessary orders in writing, if so required, to restrain publication of details of mediation proceedings.”

The five-judge bench directed the UP government to make arrangements for a suitable mediation venue in Faizabad, a place to stay for the mediators, their security, travel and other requirements “forthwith” to enable them to start work in a week. It gave the panel the liberty to co-opt more mediators if needed and also take “such legal assistance” as they may feel necessary at any stage of mediation.

The court asked the panel to make efforts to complete the mediation process in eight weeks and submit a progress report in four weeks. Specifying the eight-week period is significant as this means the SC is exploring mediation as an alternative dispute-resolution process, and if it fails, will resume hearing on the appeals against the Allahabad HC verdict, which had divided the disputed land equally among Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Wakf Board.