Opinion

How Advani’s rath yatra and the demolition of the Babri Masjid led to the discovery of another India

The razing of the mosque on this day 25 years ago was meant to convey to Muslims their unequal status as citizens of this country.

The demolition of the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992, has a past, distinct from the history of the dispute over it. The two are often hitched together to justify a political project. Those who reduced the Babri Masjid to rubble 25 years ago claim that it was built in 1528 after destroying a Ram temple, which had once stood at the site of Lord Ram’s birth in Ayodhya, in present-day Uttar Pradesh. From this perspective, the demolition of the mosque becomes a valiant action undertaken to undo the wrong committed centuries ago.

It is by delinking the history of the dispute over the Babri Masjid from its demolition that we can grasp the consequences of the cataclysmic event India is commemorating today. The demolition comprised a chain of episodes calibrated to spawn the fervour for building a Ram temple at the spot where the Babri Masjid stood. This was impossible to achieve without pulling down the mosque.

A reality check

The inevitably of its demolition was revealed to me because of my experience when Bharatiya Janata Party leader LK Advani undertook the rath yatra from Somnath in Gujarat to Ayodhya, in September and October of 1990. Beginning his journey on September 25, Advani’s yatra triggered communal tension in the areas he journeyed through. Holding aloft, like Lord Ram, a bow and arrow, he symbolised the militant Hindu eager to go to war. An invisible boundary sprang up between Hindus and Muslims. Riots broke out. Curfew was imposed.

Through Advani’s yatra I was discovering another India, of which I had been oblivious in college, from where I had graduated only four years ago. We were not self-consciously Hindus or Muslims then. No doubt, the 1984 pogrom against the Sikhs, and the 1980 Hindu-Muslim riots in Moradabad, sucked us into a vortex of confusion. But it was assumed that it wasn’t the educated middle class that supported or participated in the barbaric violence. We weren’t that type of Hindu or Muslim, those who lived in slums and killed.

Advani’s rath yatra made it a fashion among the middle class to flaunt their Hindu identity, to openly declare their support for a temple in Ayodhya and the BJP, unmindful of the venomous speeches their hotheads delivered against Muslims. It was now hard to predict the choices of your next-door neighbour, not least because four years in journalism had acquainted me with the complicity of neighbours, tacit or otherwise, in the killing of Sikhs in 1984.

This doubt played out one night in 1990 in Delhi.

I lived with cousins then, bachelors all, trying to carve out a career in Delhi. They did not wish to have their identity revealed. I will call them Cousin One and Cousin Two. On that night, a family friend, a Hindu, was over at our place. After dinner, I took to reading a novel in the room where Cousin Two was flipping through a magazine. Cousin One and the friend were chatting in the living room. The time was close to 11 pm.

The night’s silence was rent by a succession of staccato sounds. It resembled an exchange of gunfire. Or was it fire crackers? The night lapsed into silence before the sound returned after an interval, a little closer than before, a little louder as well. A thought arose: “Not far is Mehrauli, which has a substantial Muslim population. Could it be…”

I looked up from the book I was reading and found Cousin Two staring at me. In his taut face were writ questions assailing me as well: Is it gunfire? Has a riot broken out? Instead, he asked, “What is it?”

We stepped out on the balcony: the road was deserted; the night rediscovered its silence. Back in our room, we returned to reading.

Moments later, the rat-a-tat was loud enough to prompt us to our feet. To our room had come Cousin One and the friend, their faces ashen. “What is it?” he asked.

But we four had turned our ears to the car that had braked to a halt below our third-floor apartment. The doors opened, we heard voices we couldn’t decipher, the car’s engine humming.

The friend switched off the lights, and drew the curtains. We stood in darkness, our ears trying to pick up the sound of footsteps climbing the staircase. She shifted a curtain to peep outside the window. “There are men below,” she whispered. Our hearts thumped. We waited.

The sound of the car reversing echoed to us. They were driving away.

“Let us go, let us be together,” said one of us. It implied going over to the home of our uncle, who too lived in the same colony. His flat and ours were separated by about 100 meters.

Gingerly, we stepped out, our footsteps falling silently as we descended the stairwell. We began to walk briskly, breaking out into a run as the rat-a-tat sound returned, accompanied with voices jubilating.

We jabbed at uncle’s doorbell. Were they sleeping? We rang the bell again. On the third attempt, the door opened a crack, the voice behind it asked, “Who?” Seeing us, uncle muttered hoarsely, “The sound?” It wasn’t just our imagination then, we hadn’t needlessly panicked. The rat-a-tat sound was indeed real.

We spent the night together, drawing sustenance from each other. But for a short burst of rat-a-tat, the night was soon enveloped in silence. It was a tragedy: it marked the death of our assumptions and certitudes. Like all deaths, this death too demanded we reconcile to our loss.

The reconciliation became easier because we subsequently read media reports from Uttar Pradesh on a new technique of spawning communal tension. Media reports claimed that militant Hindu groups would play tape-recorded sounds in the vicinity of Muslim colonies – of gunfire, people screaming as if under assault, shuffling footsteps of men and women fleeing.

That night was not imagined then, we said to ourselves. Yet it seemed ridiculous to confirm from our neighbours whether what we had heard were indeed gunshots. Did we need to know the answer? After all, that night had bestowed wisdom on us.

Identity and India

Identity is not a choice in India. We define ourselves as much as we are defined by others. Muslims cannot escape their Muslim-ness, no matter how deracinated they are. That night conveyed to us our instinctive distrust of the state’s neutrality, illustrated to us so many times in the past and, subsequently, in 2002 in Gujarat. Our incomprehension, even our disdain, for educated middle class Muslims who prefer to live in ghettoes, in slummy conditions, melted away.

That darkled night underscored to me why the Ram Janmabhoomi movement was essentially a campaign to demolish the Babri Masjid. Its destruction was meant to convey to Muslims their unequal status, their subservience, regardless of the rights guaranteed under the Constitution. For the wrongs of the past, imagined or otherwise, the Muslims of independent India had to be made to pay a price as a token of their repentance. I knew then that the Babri Masjid would eventually be demolished.

When it was indeed reduced to rubble on December 6, 1992, it felt like the death of a relative who had been on a life support system for long. A makeshift temple sprang up at the spot.

Will history repeat itself?

For some, though, it was a traumatic moment. I remember what the late philosopher Ramachandra Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi and brother of Rajmohan and Gopalkrishna Gandhi, told me a couple of days after the demolition. “About Hindus, it was said that they never kill a saint,” he said. “They killed Mahatma Gandhi. It was said that they never destroy a place of worship. They have demolished the Babri Masjid.”

Frankly, I was relieved at the demolition of the Babri Masjid, believing the Sangh Parivar has been denied the opportunity to keep the temple-mosque dispute simmering for electoral and ideological gains. I then did not know that the Babri Masjid was to have an afterlife.

This was because after the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the PV Narasimha Rao government acquired 66.7 acres of land in Ayodhya, including the site of the Babri Masjid, through the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993. Section 4(3) of the Act extinguished all court proceedings over rights to any property in the acquired area. This meant the title dispute over the Babri Masjid – whether Hindus or Muslims owned it – abated.

The Act also stated that status quo before the land acquisition would be maintained. Since the makeshift temple had been built after the Babri Masjid was demolished, the puja of Ram Lalla was to continue.

In 1994, a five-member judge bench of the Supreme Court struck down Section 4(3) of the Act, thereby reviving the title dispute over the Babri Masjid. But with the majority of 3:2 the Supreme Court accepted most other provisions of the Act, including the continuation of puja at the makeshift temple.

In 2010, the Allahabad High Court divided the disputed land in Ayodhya three ways, a relief the disputants in the title case had not asked for. It was a suit to determine who held the title to the Babri Masjid site. The High Court verdict was challenged in the Supreme Court.

In contrast, the trial of those who demolished the Babri Masjid is still in the lower court. We have two parallel cases – one that pertains to the history of the legal dispute over the Babri Masjid and the other that is linked to the history of its demolition.

While the Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing of the title dispute to February 2018, the history of the demolition has been relegated in importance. As Justice MS Liberhan told the Indian Express a few days ago, “The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the appeal in the matter of the Ayodhya title dispute…will adversely affect the demolition suit…If the Hindu side gets it, then the act of demolition becomes seen as ‘justified’ – to reclaim own property.”

Ironically then, on the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Masjid, begins our wait to know whether history in India repeats itself – the first time as tragedy, the second time as its justification.

Ajaz Ashraf is a journalist in Delhi. His novel, The Hour Before Dawn, has as its backdrop the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Putting the patient first - insights for hospitals to meet customer service expectations

These emerging solutions are a fine balance between technology and the human touch.

As customers become more vocal and assertive of their needs, their expectations are changing across industries. Consequently, customer service has gone from being a hygiene factor to actively influencing the customer’s choice of product or service. This trend is also being seen in the healthcare segment. Today good healthcare service is no longer defined by just qualified doctors and the quality of medical treatment offered. The overall ambience, convenience, hospitality and the warmth and friendliness of staff is becoming a crucial way for hospitals to differentiate themselves.

A study by the Deloitte Centre for Health Solutions in fact indicates that good patient experience is also excellent from a profitability point of view. The study, conducted in the US, analyzed the impact of hospital ratings by patients on overall margins and return on assets. It revealed that hospitals with high patient-reported experience scores have higher profitability. For instance, hospitals with ‘excellent’ consumer assessment scores between 2008 and 2014 had a net margin of 4.7 percent, on average, as compared to just 1.8 percent for hospitals with ‘low’ scores.

This clearly indicates that good customer service in hospitals boosts loyalty and goodwill as well as financial performance. Many healthcare service providers are thus putting their efforts behind: understanding constantly evolving customer expectations, solving long-standing problems in hospital management (such as long check-out times) and proactively offering a better experience by leveraging technology and human interface.

The evolving patient

Healthcare service customers, who comprise both the patient and his or her family and friends, are more exposed today to high standards of service across industries. As a result, hospitals are putting patient care right on top of their priorities. An example of this in action can be seen in the Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. In July 2015, the hospital launched a ‘Smart OPD’ system — an integrated mobile health system under which the entire medical ecosystem of the hospital was brought together on a digital app. Patients could use the app to book/reschedule doctor’s appointments and doctors could use it to access a patient’s medical history, write prescriptions and schedule appointments. To further aid the process, IT assistants were provided to help those uncomfortable with technology.

The need for such initiatives and the evolving nature of patient care were among the central themes of the recently concluded Abbott Hospital Leadership Summit. The speakers included pundits from marketing and customer relations along with leaders in the healthcare space.

Among them was the illustrious speaker Larry Hochman, a globally recognised name in customer service. According to Mr. Hochman, who has worked with British Airways and Air Miles, patients are rapidly evolving from passive recipients of treatment to active consumers who are evaluating their overall experience with a hospital on social media and creating a ‘word-of-mouth’ economy. He talks about this in the video below.

Play

As the video says, with social media and other public platforms being available today to share experiences, hospitals need to ensure that every customer walks away with a good experience.

The promise gap

In his address, Mr. Hochman also spoke at length about the ‘promise gap’ — the difference between what a company promises to deliver and what it actually delivers. In the video given below, he explains the concept in detail. As the gap grows wider, the potential for customer dissatisfaction increases.

Play

So how do hospitals differentiate themselves with this evolved set of customers? How do they ensure that the promise gap remains small? “You can create a unique value only through relationships, because that is something that is not manufactured. It is about people, it’s a human thing,” says Mr. Hochman in the video below.

Play

As Mr. Hochman and others in the discussion panel point out, the key to delivering a good customer experience is to instil a culture of empathy and hospitality across the organisation. Whether it is small things like smiling at patients, educating them at every step about their illness or listening to them to understand their fears, every action needs to be geared towards making the customer feel that they made the correct decision by getting treated at that hospital. This is also why, Dr. Nandkumar Jairam, Chairman and Group Medical Director, Columbia Asia, talked about the need for hospitals to train and hire people with soft skills and qualities such as empathy and the ability to listen.

Striking the balance

Bridging the promise gap also involves a balance between technology and the human touch. Dr. Robert Pearl, Executive Director and CEO of The Permanente Medical Group, who also spoke at the event, wrote about the example of Dr. Devi Shetty’s Narayana Health Hospitals. He writes that their team of surgeons typically performs about 900 procedures a month which is equivalent to what most U.S. university hospitals do in a year. The hospitals employ cutting edge technology and other simple innovations to improve efficiency and patient care.

The insights gained from Narayana’s model show that while technology increases efficiency of processes, what really makes a difference to customers are the human touch-points. As Mr. Hochman says, “Human touch points matter more because there are less and less of them today and are therefore crucial to the whole customer experience.”

Play

By putting customers at the core of their thinking, many hospitals have been able to apply innovative solutions to solve age old problems. For example, Max Healthcare, introduced paramedics on motorcycles to circumvent heavy traffic and respond faster to critical emergencies. While ambulances reach 30 minutes after a call, the motorcycles reach in just 17 minutes. In the first three months, two lives were saved because of this customer-centric innovation.

Hospitals are also looking at data and consumer research to identify consumer pain points. Rajit Mehta, the MD and CEO of Max Healthcare Institute, who was a panelist at the summit, spoke of the importance of data to understand patient needs. His organisation used consumer research to identify three critical areas that needed work - discharge and admission processes for IPD patients and wait-time for OPD patients. To improve wait-time, they incentivised people to book appointments online. They also installed digital kiosks where customers could punch in their details to get an appointment quickly.

These were just some of the insights on healthcare management gleaned from the Hospital Leadership Summit hosted by Abbott. In over 150 countries, Abbott is working with hospitals and healthcare professionals to improve the quality of health services.

To read more content on best practices for hospital leaders, visit Abbott’s Bringing Health to Life portal here.

This article was produced on behalf of Abbott by the Scroll.in marketing team and not by the Scroll.in editorial staff.