The priceless antiquities of India like the Kohinoor Diamond, the golden throne of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Jade Wine cup of Shah Jahan, and Tipu Sultan’s sword were taken away from us by colonial masters and invaders. These antiquities are now adorning museums world over. BKSR Ayyangar, an RTI applicant approached the External Affairs Ministry and the Prime Minister’s Office with the query on these precious remnants from the past. From both the ministries, his query was transferred to Archaeological Survey of India which clarified that it was not under their domain to make efforts to bring them back.
BKSR Ayyangar through the RTI wanted to fetch the records pertaining to the efforts of the government to bring back Kohinoor diamond, Sultanganj Buddha, Nassak diamond, the sword and ring of Tipu Sultan, the golden throne of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, royal jade wine cup of Shah Jahan, Amaravathi railings and Buddhapade, Saraswathi marble idol – Vagdevi and mechanical tiger of Tipu.
The ASI could only take up the issue of retrieval of only illegally exported antiquities in violation of the Antiquities and Treasure Act, 1972 which became operational in 1976. So why the PMO and External Affairs ministry forwarded Ayyangar’s query to ASI still remains perplexing. Through the efforts of ASI, about 25 antiquities have been retrieved from various other countries during 2014-2017.
Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu asked Archana Asthana why they didn’t transfer the request to PMO or the Ministry of Culture? She answered, “These applications were filed at first with them only. I didn’t understand why they sent to us.”
See also:Modi, the first Indian PM to address and deliver a keynote at Shangri La dialogue
Sridhar Acharyulu said that deep sentiments were associated with those heritage objects as some of them were religiously considered sacred and some with historic value. Marble Vagdevi of Bhoj Raj, Buddha’s statue from Sultanganj, Nassak diamond called ‘eye’ of Shiva are objects considered sacred religiously. The Kohinoor, Tippu’s Sword, ring and mechanical animal are things of historical importance.
In the order issued by CIC, it is said that they legitimately belonged to India and people of past, present and future generations were interested in repossessing them. Acharyulu said that the government could not ignore those sentiments which were reflected by representations, public interest litigations and RTI requests. Acharyulu deems the Union Government’s stance on this issue as one which creates confusion. The successive governments since independence had given many reports and multiple statements to the number of petitions in the Supreme Courts regarding the bringing back of antiquities.
Acharyulu said that when the Cultural Minister informed the Supreme Court that efforts were on the way, they were obliged to inform about the progress too. Acharyulu asked,”Knowing that the ASI had no legal power to recover pre-independence artefacts from British how could PMO and Ministry of Culture conclude that RTI application “is more closely connected with functions of the ASI”.According to Acharyulu diplomacy at a higher level of the PM or External Affairs Minister or High Commissioners of India and other nations concerned would help to get back the unlawfully seized rightful possessions to India. The information on the efforts shall not be denied to the parliament or to the citizens as per proviso under Section 8(1) of RTI Act. The PMO and Ministry of Culture are definitely not above that law and the transfer of RTI requests to ASI is a breach of duty.
On this regard, Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu has sought an explanation from PMO regarding the transfer of RTI query to ASI, when it is clearly stated in the Act of 1972 that subject matter of the request was not under their control.
Post Your Comments