First, there was the fudge. Then, the dodge. And finally, humiliation. The fudge was orchestrated by Jayendra Saraswati, the Shankaracharya of Kanchipuram. He did not offer a new or a more equitable solution. All the elements of his solution were old and manifestly pro-Hindu. The so-called "undisputed" land should be returned to the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas (RJN), the construction of the Ram temple should begin, and the parties should await the verdict of the courts on the "disputed" land where a mosque stood until it was demolished by a rampaging mob on December 6, 1992. What was there in the solution for the Muslims? No promise that the construction plans should be altered to locate the sanctum sanctorum at a spot outside the disputed part of the land. No promise that the mosque should be rebuilt at the original site if the courts rule in favour of the Muslims. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board saw through the game and with compelling logic demolished the proposal. The seer of Kanchi withdrew to his mutt and into silence. He should not have, in the first place, ventured into legal and political territory.

The dodge was in keeping with the recent trend. Since the days of P.V. Narasimha Rao, governments have acquired a penchant for kicking inconvenient balls into the courts of law. This time was no different. Whether shila puja or shiladaan should be allowed or not was essentially an administrative issue. It could be debated by Parliament, but it had to be resolved by the executive government. Both branches of the State were happy-as they have been on other issues in the past-to lob it into the court. Everyone joined in chanting the refrain, "We'll abide by the verdict of the court". Conveniently, a Muslim petitioned the Supreme Court and prayed for suitable orders to stop the illegal and provocative acts threatened by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. The whole episode is a sad commentary on the decline and fall of executive government. Just imagine what would have happened if Vallabhbhai Patel had decided to send to the courts the issues regarding the integration of nearly 600 native Indian states into the Union of India.

The final humiliation was expected and entirely deserved. Long before Attorney-General Soli Sorabjee took the brief (he denied he was briefed) in his hands, a long line of writers, scholars and luminaries entered TV studios and editorial pages of newspapers to argue how the proposed shila puja on "undisputed" land would not violate the 1994 judgement of the Supreme Court. From presidential aspirant L.M. Singhvi to non-practising lawyer Cho Ramasamy, everyone seemed to be reading from the same script. Soon, it became clear that the author of the script was Arun Jaitley, the law minister whose ministry opined that the "undisputed" land could be returned even at this stage to the RJN. Sorabjee, the lawyer, should have advised the Government, the client, on the law. Instead, the attorney was advised on the law by the client. Sorabjee's contribution was limited to determining the auspicious time for the puja (2.30 p.m.-5.30 p.m.), the number of sadhus who would perform the puja (300) and the number of devotees who would witness it (about 1,000).

I have often wondered why lawyers readily lend themselves to do the dirty work of pusillanimous governments. H.R. Gokhale and Mohan Kumaramangalam were commandeered to propagate the virtues of a committed judiciary. Siddharth Shankar Ray was used to proclaim the Emergency and justify the many scandalous amendments to key constitutional provisions. Now, Jaitley and Sorabjee, two extremely competent lawyers, have been used. Jaitley is a minister of the Republic, yet he preferred to take a narrow legalistic view of a judgement that has (bless the court) helped to preserve peace since 1994. Sorabjee is the attorney-general of India and the Government's first counsel, yet he did not seek written instructions from the Government. Both played into the hands of Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee who, as usual, tried to please everybody, including the lunatic fringes of Indian society. The BJP has just lost elections in four states and it is a pity the party does not realise that the main cause for its defeat is the non-governance of Vajpayee.

The Babri masjid issue has taken a heavy toll of precious lives. It has caused a severe setback to development. India's image as a modernising country has suffered a grievous blow. We cannot but hang our heads in shame when a chief minister puts a price of Rs 2 lakh on the life of a Hindu victim and Rs 1 lakh on the life of a Muslim. Thanks to the 1994 judgement there was relative peace until it was shattered by the threat to conduct shila puja, Godhra and the Gujarat carnage. Halfway through its term, we have a Central Government without a shred of legitimacy. Our cup of woes is overflowing.

(The author is a former Indian finance minister. These are his personal views)