VETTUCAUD…
-
Have
sent a mail for a discussion regarding this… No reply yet…
-
Hence
this submission, knowing well that it is a matter ‘sub-judice’
-
My
intervention should not be taken as an advocacy for multi-crore church
complexes when people still live in huts, if not in slum like situations,
besides having other pressing needs…
-
Am
well aware of having no diocesan policy regarding church constructions in place,
let alone demolishing the existing ones giving scant regard for the historicity
and other existing civil requirements…
-
A
huge structure with hectic investments is staring on all of us on our complacency
in doing things within a time frame besides the sense of helplessness of the
people concerned and the amount being wasted on avoidable litigations…
-
When
the complainant seems to have no known gains out of this litigation and no real
public interest is going to be served, one wonders why this litigation after
litigations even after the parish priest was convicted for no fault of his…
-
Did
the litigant ever had any dialogue or discussion with the parish prior to
filing the suit? If so, does the diocesan leadership know of it and what is
their stand, if at all they have any?
-
Even
when the courts encourage ADR methods, why we fail to make use of such methods
to resolve this and set an example for others to emulate?
-
Let
us not wreak vengeance taking someone else, especially a parish in a hostage
situation. It is not becoming of a priest, let alone any socially spirited
person. Let us come across the discussion table and solve this scandalous
dispute and set out framing some exemplary policies to be followed hereafter.
[Thursday, August 22, 2013]
No comments:
Post a Comment