CPM Leader M A Baby Explains LDF Government's Position on Sabarimala Temple Entry
In a significant clarification regarding the long-standing Sabarimala temple entry controversy, Communist Party of India (Marxist) general secretary M A Baby stated on Saturday that the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala had no alternative but to implement the Supreme Court order that removed restrictions on females aged 10 to 50 years from entering the sacred shrine.
Constitutional Obligation Over Party Policy
Addressing media queries in New Delhi about the state government's apparent reversal on the Sabarimala women's entry issue, Baby emphasized that the LDF administration was duty-bound to execute the Supreme Court directive. He clarified that while the CPM maintains firm opinions on matters concerning places of worship, the party never insisted that the LDF government align its governance with the party's stance.
"The media is free to make interpretations, but the state government never endorsed unilateral decisions regarding places of worship," Baby asserted during the press interaction.
Historical Context and Current Review
Baby referenced the previous V S Achuthanandan-led government's approach, noting that it had suggested to the Supreme Court that any decisions about altering customary practices should involve consultation with religious scholars and knowledgeable individuals. This historical perspective informs the current government's position, according to the CPM leader.
The recent affidavit submitted by the LDF government, which objects to changes in Sabarimala customs and practices, operates within a different context, Baby explained. "The Supreme Court is now reviewing its own order and has actually expanded the scope of the subject," he stated.
Broader Implications Beyond Sabarimala
Baby highlighted that the Supreme Court's current examination extends beyond Sabarimala to encompass wider questions about tradition and practice modifications in all places of worship. The apex court has specifically asked the state government to provide opinions on multiple points, including how far judicial intervention should extend into matters of religious customs and traditions.
"The questions are not limited to Sabarimala. They concern changes in traditions and practices at any place of worship," Baby elaborated. "One key question being examined is the extent to which the court can intervene in matters of customs, practices, and traditions at religious sites."
Balancing Constitutional Rights and Social Harmony
The CPM leader emphasized that political parties must consider multiple dimensions when addressing such sensitive issues. While the Constitution guarantees fundamental rights to citizens, Baby stressed that these rights should be exercised without disrupting social harmony.
"Generally, such social changes should be advocated based on consensus within society," Baby remarked. "The Constitution promises fundamental rights, but these rights should be implemented without breaking societal harmony."
Clarifying Government's Role
Baby firmly rejected suggestions that the LDF government was attempting to impose its own decisions at Sabarimala. "The LDF government wasn't trying to implement its decision at Sabarimala. It was following the Supreme Court order," he clarified. He noted that all political parties initially welcomed the court order, though some changed their positions shortly afterward.
The current government's response to the Supreme Court's latest questions reflects the same spirit as the Achuthanandan administration's earlier affidavit, which proposed that expert teams knowledgeable about religious matters should be entrusted with decisions regarding changes to traditional practices at places of worship.
