Echoing Prasad's views, he said the government could not have imposed President's rule in Uttar Pradesh as the governor's report was against it and it would have been difficult to justify the situation constitutionally.
When asked if Rao had failed to anticipate the danger, Prasad said, "We are talking in retrospect. Before the incident has happened, all the issues have been discussed."
"All these issues except that you mistrust the BJP, there is no other point which would warrant you to take a decision like this. Taking that people are trying to say, you are hand in glove with the BJP.
"On that day, the situation was that even if you believed that the structure has the potential danger, still you could not have done anything," said Prasad.
"Because, Constitutionally you have to justify your actions. How do you do that? The governor's report is against President's rule. Law and order failure is not there. Then IB report is there," he said.
Except Arjun Singh's statement or general rumour, how do you go? On that basis if you go for president's rule, then what happens to the Constitution, Prasad said.
"Supposing if the structure was not demolished, then P V Narasimha Rao was right? You are trying to judge the things after it has happened. Vajpayee himself was shocked. The Supreme Court was shocked. That was the situation," he said.
