Listen to this article:

The Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust, the autonomous body overseeing Ram Mandir, constituted by the Government of India six and a half years ago in accordance with Supreme Court directives alongside the influence of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has taken steps to address the issue of the theft of offerings at the Ayodhya temple by appointing a chief executive officer (CEO). This move has sparked considerable debate.

Firstly, by making this appointment, the Trust has – albeit indirectly – acknowledged the flaws in its management, which it had previously denied and ignored for years. It is well known that this deliberate ignorance resulted in serious corruption allegations against the Trust, not only regarding the misappropriation of donations but also involving land transactions and various other matters.

Secondly, despite the significant passage of time, the Trust maintains that there should be no compromise on the dominance of the RSS in the management of the temple. It is not without reason that even Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwaranand remarked that what has actually been constructed in Ayodhya is not a temple, but rather an office and asset of the RSS.

In line with this, the three newly appointed trustees along with the CEO, general secretary, and treasurer all hail from families associated with the RSS. However, the most unexpected appointment is that of Govind Dev Giri as the general secretary. He served as the treasurer of the temple when the theft of offerings was uncovered.

His change of role as general secretary comes even though it is widely known that the case is sub-judice before the Supreme Court and is being investigated by a freshly-constituted Special Investigation Team (SIT). It would have been appropriate to wait for the outcome of this investigation before awarding this post to Giri, in order to ascertain the findings regarding his involvement as the treasurer.

It is worth recalling that when the donation theft, estimated at Rs 3 crore, came to light, Giri had expressed that he felt “deeply hurt, saddened, and ashamed,” while simultaneously distancing himself from any accountability for the incident. He had asserted that he had never been directly involved in the area where the hundi (donation box) offerings were counted, as he only visited Ayodhya from his Pune residence once or twice a month and he was not an authorised signatory for the Trust’s financial transactions.

An attitude riddled with contradictions

Such a stance effectively demonstrated his detachment from the responsibilities inherent in the role of Treasurer. Yet, he failed to acknowledge any moral responsibility for the matter, nor did he agree to resign on those grounds. Furthermore, he repeatedly asserted that he was neither personally responsible for the theft nor had he committed any wrongdoing.

He also absolved Champat Rai, then general secretary of the Trust, of any involvement in the theft, claiming that Rai’s sole mistake was trusting the wrong individual. This raises a question that still demands an answer: was he........

© The Wire