Thiruvananthapuram | With the Assembly polls just a day away, the BJP in Kerala on Tuesday criticised both the ruling LDF and opposition UDF over their stand on the Sabarimala issue, accusing them of taking a "U-turn" on the entry of young women into the hill shrine.
Addressing a press conference at Nemom here, state BJP chief Rajeev Chandrasekhar sought to know the reasons behind the alleged shift in the positions of the CPI(M)-led LDF and the Congress-led UDF.
Alleging that the state government had registered over 3,000 cases against those who protested against the entry of young women into the Sabarimala temple in the past, he urged the authorities to withdraw the cases immediately.
His remarks came on the day a nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court of India commenced hearing petitions related to discrimination against women at religious places, including Sabarimala, and the scope of religious freedom across faiths.
"BJP is the only political party which has taken a consistent stand to protect the faith of Sabarimala devotees," Chandrasekhar claimed.
With the apex court beginning hearings on the issue, the people of Kerala should recall the positions adopted earlier by both the LDF and UDF on women's entry, he said.
He added that the Left government still has an opportunity to "correct its mistake" by withdrawing cases registered against Ayyappa devotees.
Alleging that both fronts had shifted their stance on the Lord Ayyappa temple issue, the BJP leader said he was, however, "happy" about their "changed stand" and urged them to clarify the reasons behind the shift.
The Constitution bench hearing the matter comprises Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi.
Ahead of the hearing, the Centre filed written submissions requesting the top court to uphold restrictions on the entry of women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala temple.
The Union government said the issue falls within the domain of religious faith and denominational autonomy and lies beyond the scope of judicial review.
