New Delhi:
The Sunni Waqf Board has decided to appeal in the Supreme Court, against last week's Ayodhya verdict, but opinions are divided within the community's top leaders and institutions.
The oldest living litigant Mohammad Hashim Ansari backs a compromise, as does the All Indian Muslim personal law Board, which meets on October 16th for future course of action. But the Sunni Waqf Board is questioning the law board's authority.
"The Sunni Waqf Board is a statutory body. It is only morally bound by the decisions of the personal law board but is not legally bound," said Zafaryab Jilani, Counsel, Sunni Waqf Board.
But the Muslim side's dilemma is that, because of the Babri Masjid was demolished despite various promises to protect it, the community may need assurances before agreeing to talks.
The other issue is who will talk and who will give the assurance, is not clear.
"Nobody has been authorised as yet by the Board for talks," said Zufar Ahmed Farooqi, the Chairman of the Waqf Board.
While there have been several independent voices seeking a compromise, but there is still uncertainty not only amongst those representing the Muslims, but even the Hindus.
The Nirmohi Akhada which got a third of the land wants complete control over any Ram Janambhoomi Temple.
The problem is twofold. First, the VHP, which controls the temple construction plan may not agree to this. Second, the key bit of land, the one with the makeshift temple, has gone to the deity's representative who says he's unaware of any efforts at a compromise.
In the absence of any firm proposal or serious interlocutors, all parties are wary of each other.
There are reasons why in the last 60 years the Ayodhya crisis hasn't come close to a compromise. The title dispute is between a motley group of litigants and once again the compromise chatter is limited to ordinary players, with the big players staying away.
In the absence of a referee, like the Central government, there is no one to ensure that promises are made. And in future promises are kept.