Waqf present in every Muslim country, says Owaisi
The time-honed strategy of prayer, petition and protest continues to drive the countrywide protests against the Waqf (Amendment) Act, which reached the capital with a 'Save Waqf' conference at the Talkatora Stadium here on Tuesday (April 22, 2025). Attended by leaders of virtually all sections of the Muslim community along with opposition leaders from the Congress, Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Samajwadi Party, the conference decided to pursue a three-pronged strategy to 'get the Waqf Act revoked in totality' which, they claimed, 'violates Muslims' fundamental rights'.
'We are against the Waqf [Amendment] Act completely, not just against a clause or two. While we request the government to take back the law, it is our democratic right to approach the Supreme Court against the Waqf [Amendment] Act, and to organize peaceful protests against the new law,' said S.Q.R. Ilyas, spokesperson of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, which organised the event.
Speaking at the conference, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen party chief Asaduddin Owaisi contested the claim of some BJP leaders that Muslim countries do not have Waqf provisions. 'Waqf is present in every [Muslim majority] country whether it has a democratic form of government or monarchy. The Prime Minister is on a two-day trip to Saudi Arabia. He can ask the Crown Prince there. Saudi Arabia has Waqf too,' Mr. Owaisi said.
He also questioned the Prime Minister's claim that the new amendments have been welcomed by some sections of the Muslim community. 'We have leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, Barelvi sect leaders, Shia leaders, even those of the Bohra Jamaat who are supporting us. Some 18 to 19 crore Muslims are against this law. It is against the fundamental rights given by the Constitution. The Prime Minister claims 31% of Muslims are poor. They are poor because he hates Muslims. He will be friends with the Saudi prince but talk of recognizing Indian Muslims by their clothes.'
RJD leader Manoj Jha saw the Waqf amendments as 'part of an attack on the Constitution'. 'The Waqf Act is against the Constitution. They say, the Parliament is supreme. We say, the Constitution is supreme,' Mr. Jha said, adding, 'People will try to mislead us. We should stay united.' Samajwadi Party leader Dhamendra Yadav assured the Muslim Personal Law Board of support. 'Whether in courts, or in Parliament or on the road, our party stands with you,' Mr. Yadav said. His colleague, Muhibullah Nadwi, Rampur MP, who was part of the Joint Parliamentary Committee, also attended the event.
Meanwhile, former Rajya Sabha MP Mohammed Adeeb said the Muslim community had been sleeping all these years 'but the Waqf [Amendment] Act has woken up the community. It has found its voice'.
The conference was also attended by top leaders of two major Muslim bodies, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind and Jamiat ulama-i-Hind. 'The fight to protect Waqf is a fight for our very existence. Protecting Waqf is our religious duty. It is encouraging that the entire Opposition is united in support for us. If we move ahead with solidarity no government can stop us. We are a living nation, and living nations do not fall into despair. If we truly want to protect the Constitution, then the entire Waqf Act-2025 should be abolished,' Mr Arshad Madani, president of the Jamiat, said in a statement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Wire
20 minutes ago
- The Wire
Why the Response to Rahul Gandhi's Accusation of a Stolen Election Is Less Than Convincing
It has taken the Election Commission four months to respond to opposition leader Rahul Gandhi's first disturbing accusation at a press conference in February – that the Commission had somehow managed not to notice that there were 16 lakh more adults on the voters' list for the Maharashtra assembly elections than the entire adult population of the state , and that while the electorate in the state had increased by 32 lakh persons between the 2014 and 2019 Lok Sabha elections, it had increased by 39 lakhs in five months between the Lok Sabha and assembly elections in 2024 . On June 7, Rahul Gandhi repeated the accusation with elaborations in an editorial page article in the Indian Express . Its responses came in the same newspaper in the form of an elaborate piece by reporters quoting an unnamed official of the Election Commission and a condescending article belittling Rahul Gandhi, by no less important a person than the chief minister of Maharashtra, Devendra Fadnavis. That these were published within 24 hours of Gandhi's article shows that the Indian Express had felt it necessary to submit Gandhi's letter to the Modi government and had waited for its response before publishing . This extraordinary act of caution from a newspaper widely respected for its courage shows just how severe the pressure from the Modi government on the media has become during the past 11 years. Since these are separate pieces, I shall deal with their merits separately. Defending the present system for the constitution of the Election Commission, the piece by three Indian Express writers asks why no previous government did not institutionalise a 'more transparent appointment mechanism'. The answer is that till the advent of the Modi government, no previous regime had felt the need to do so. This was because the Chief Election Commissioner was appointed by presidents and prime ministers of India who so deeply respected the letter and the spirit of the Constitution that the possibility that any one of them would conspire with the government in power to gerrymander the result of a Lok Sabha or assembly election had never arisen. T. Swaminathan was the CEC in 1975 when Indira Gandhi declared the Emergency and in 1977 when, despite having been warned by the Intelligence Bureau that the Congress would lose heavily in the next election she went ahead with it. As P.N. Dhar, her principal secretary in those years, has written in his memoirs, the possibility of continuing the Emergency for another year never arose in her mind. By the same token, S.L. Shakdher was the CEC when the Congress (I) came roaring back to power in 1980. No one questioned his complete integrity either then or later. Then, T.N. Seshan put an end to booth capturing by splitting the Lok Sabha elections into several phases and getting every polling station guarded by the police or the Central Reserve Police Forces. The opposition went to the Supreme Court only after it became convinced that Modi was pressuring the Election Commission members to secure decisions from them. This became public knowledge when the next-in-line CEC, Ashok Lavasa, abruptly submitted his resignation to the President of India, to join the Asian Development Bank in August 2020 . He did so because he did not agree with the CEC's exoneration of Modi and home minister Shah from charges of violating the EC's Model Code of Conduct during their campaigning for the 2019 elections. It was this blatant discord within the Commission that made the Supreme Court issue its directive in 2023 that future election commissioners had to be selected jointly by the prime minister, the leader of the opposition, and the Chief Justice of India. The Modi government once again treated this directive with contempt, and made a mockery of the Supreme Court directive by passing an amended version that replaced the CJI in the three-member panel of selectors with a minister, pretty much, of the prime minister's choice. The Indian Express piece quotes an unnamed 'senior Election Commission official', who says: 'Now for the first time a law made by Parliament under article 325 is in place for the appointment of the CEC and ECs … now there is consultancy, there is transparency'. This is an insult to anyone who reads the English language. The only 'transparency' in the new law is that in the future it shall be the prime minister who will appoint all the members of the Election Commission. Coming to Rahul Gandhi's second charge, that 41 lakh new voters were added to the electoral rolls in five months between the Lok Sabha and assembly elections, the lengthy response on Indian Express can be summed up in one sentence: if there has been widespread electoral malpractice, then why did no one from a single opposition party lodge a complaint before the election? It points out, '[P]olitical parties are involved at every stage of preparing the final electoral roll…Election authorities regularly hold meetings with political parties, provide them free copies of draft and final rolls, and publish these on official websites. During the summary revision period, weekly lists of additions and deletions are shared to allow objections.' The Election Commission's website has, in fact, a 24-page detailed report that elaborates upon this process at length. Ahead of the Maharashtra election, it went on to add, it held discussions with 103,727 representatives of the various parties, of whom 27,099 were from the Congress. The piece does not say 'various opposition parties', so this offers no clarity on how many were from the Maha Vikas Agadi opposition coalition. What this 'scrutiny' piece did not say was that even if we assume that half of these representatives – so, 52,000 – were from the MVA, then for this number of representatives to examine the lists of 100,186 polling booths, each MVA representative had to examine current and earlier versions of voters' lists that contained close to 2,000 names. Closely comparing current and earlier voting lists for every polling booth, even if comparable lists existed or had been preserved, would have been a mammoth task that few would have been able to accomplish, even if they had considered it necessary. And before the 2024 elections it had never been considered necessary because the nation's trust in the Election Commission had been complete. This is the trust that the Modi government has shattered. This loss of faith is justified. When the Aam Aadmi Party did begin to examine the updated voters' lists closely after its shock defeat in Delhi, it found that the names added and deleted in 17 out of its 70 constituencies using Form 7 of the Election Commission's registration forms had shifted an average of 3% of the vote to the BJP. The impact of these additions and deletions can be judged from the fact that the BJP's winning margin of the vote in Delhi was just 1.99%. It is not surprising therefore that the EC has so far adamantly ignored the demand for access to all the Form 7s that were used to add or delete voters to and from the electoral lists in Maharashtra. Finally the paper is silent on Rahul Gandhi's two most important allegations: How has the voters' list exceeded the entire adult population of Maharashtra by 16 lakhs, and how did the size of the electorate increase by nearly 41 lakhs in five months from the Lok Sabha elections of 2024 to the assembly elections of 2025, when it had increased by only 31 lakhs in five years from 2019 till 2024 ? To this, needless to say, the Election commission has given no answer. So I went to Grok, the 'most advanced' artificial intelligence system developed in the world so far, for an answer. After surveying each and every election and by-election held in India over the past 75 years, it concluded that the result of the assembly election in Maharashtra 'is the biggest mystery in the history of Indian elections'. This is part one of a two-part series on Rahul Gandhi's claims on the Maharashtra elections. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Economic Times
27 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Iran-Israel conflict: How secret friends turned bitter enemies
iStock Israel has initiated a military operation against Iran's nuclear facilities After nearly two decades of hostilities, Israel has finally attacked Iran's nuclear facilities, ballistic missile factories and military commanders during the start of a prolonged operation to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapons. Last year, Israel had struck Iran's defence facilities and Iran's launched retaliatory strikes on Israel but that was a limited conflict. "We are at a decisive moment in Israel's history," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a recorded video message yesterday. "Moments ago Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival. This operation will continue for as many days as it takes to remove this threat." The relationship between Iran and Israel stands today as one of the most hostile and fraught rivalries in international politics. However, this animosity belies a complex history of covert cooperation, strategic alliances and shared interests that lasted for several decades. They used to be friends once, then became secret allies, and finally turned bitter enemies. Also Read: Why Israel bombed Iran's nuclear sites and what it means for global security, oil, and trade Following the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, most Muslim-majority countries refused to recognise it. Iran, a predominantly Shia country with a long imperial history and uneasy relations with Arab states, was an exception. While Iran did not officially recognise Israel, the two countries developed discreet and pragmatic relations rooted in shared strategic concerns. Under the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran followed a Western-aligned foreign policy during the Cold War and was a key regional ally of the United States. Israel, since it was dependent on American support, found a natural partner in strategic doctrine in the 1950s and 1960s, known as the Periphery Doctrine or sought to build alliances with non-Arab states in the Middle East that were hostile to pan-Arab nationalism. Iran, along with Turkey and Ethiopia, became a central partner in this strategy. In a secret meeting in 1958, Israeli prime minister David Ben-Gurion and Turkish prime minister Adnan Menderes formed the so-called "alliance of the periphery" following which Iran, Turkey and Israel established a pact known as the "Trident". The relationship included intelligence sharing, economic cooperation, and arms trade. Notably, the Mossad and Iran's spy agency SAVAK collaborated closely. Israel also provided military advisors and technical support to Iran, especially during the development of the Iranian military-industrial Israel-Iran relationship was significant economically too. Iran supplied Israel with crude oil, particularly after the 1967 Six-Day War when many Arab nations imposed boycotts. In return, Israel provided Iran with advanced agricultural and technological assistance. Israeli companies were active in infrastructure development projects across Iran. Also Read: Iran accuses US of 'supporting' Israel in carrying out strikes As per a declassified CIA document, "Israel's ties to Iran developed from a broader Israeli effort to forge links to strategically-located non-Arab states, also including Turkey and Ethiopia, after the 1956 Suez Crisis. Israel figured that it had much in common with these states, each of which nurtured its own set of grievances with neighboring Arab countries. All had reasons to fear the emergence of Arab power and to resent Soviet military support for their enemies, Ali maintained a close relationship with the US, and all bordered on strategically important international waterways.""Building on these commonalities," the CIA document says, "Israel eventually developed nearly full diplomatic relations with Turkey and Ethiopia. Relations with Iran developed more slowly and cautiously, due mainly to the Shah's concern for the Islamic sensibilities of his subjects. Nevertheless, Israel and Iran eventually exchanged missions which enjoyed diplomatic privileges and built up close economic and security relations in the 1960s and 1970s. Iran became Israel's chief supplier of crude oil until Israel began operating the Sinai oil fields following its conquest of the territory in the Six Day War. After Israel returned the fields to Egypt under the Sinai II Agreements in 1975, Iran once again became the chief source of oil, supplying about 70 percent of Israel's requirement until the overthrow of the Shah in 1979." The CIA document also claimed that Israel regularly sold armaments to Iran during the Shah's reign, "The arms sales gave a significant boost to Israel's fledgling defense industries, and barter arrangements secured much-needed oil in return for arms and technical assistance." As per the CIA, Israel also was interested in assisting Iran in its support of Kurdish separatists in Iraq, and Iran, in turn, may have provided Mossad with intelligence concerning the Iraqi military. The document says that Israel also sought to ensure welfare of the 90,000 Jews who lived in Iranian Revolution of 1979 marked a fundamental break in Iran-Israel bilateral relations. The overthrow of the Shah and the establishment of the Islamic Republic under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini radically altered Iran's foreign policy. The new Islamic regime viewed Israel not only as a political adversary but also as an illegitimate state. Khomeini's rhetoric portrayed Israel as a Zionist regime and a tool of Western imperialism. Iran's new Islamic ideology prioritised support for oppressed Muslims, particularly Palestinians, and declared unwavering opposition to Israel's existence. Iran severed all diplomatic ties with Israel, expelled Israeli personnel, and handed over the Israeli embassy in Tehran to the Palestine Liberation Organization. Anti-Israel sentiment became a core tenet of the Islamic Republic's foreign and domestic the 1980s and 1990s, Iran emerged as a key sponsor of militant groups opposed to Israel, Hezbollah in Lebanon and later Hamas in the Palestinian territories. This support extended to training, funding and the provision of weapons. Effectively, Iran was positioning itself as Israel's biggest enemy in the Middle interestingly, even after Iran and Israel had turned into enemies, secret bilateral ties persisted. During the Iran–Iraq War, which began in 1980 and lasted eight years, Israel viewed Saddam Hussein's Iraq as a greater threat than Khomeini's Islamic Iran. Israel, along with the US, became involved in covert transfer of arms to episode, later exposed as part of the Iran–Contra affair, revealed that Israeli intermediaries had facilitated the shipment of weapons to Iran in exchange for help securing the release of American hostages in Lebanon and funding anti-communist rebels in Nicaragua. The revelation shocked many, given the public hostility between Iran and Israel. Such was the covert cooperation between Iran and Israel that the US was worried that Israel could be supplying US-origin parts or weapons to Iran, Interestingly, the CIA document cited above, dated 7 October 1985, titled 'Israel and Iran: The ties that bind' said, "We believe Israeli arms sales to Iran, which began in the late 1950s, are continuing.""We believe the Israeli Government's relatively benign attitude toward the sales is influenced by the same strategic concerns that impelled Israel to forge links to Iran in the late 1950s," the CIA document says. "The Israelis have told us that they hope their aid will help to prolong the Iran-Iraq conflict and thereby keep Baghdad's vastly enlarged military tied down along Iraq's eastern border. Their aid, however, probably would not extend to operational assistance such as providing the Iranians with battlefield intelligence. The Israelis probably fear that such assistance would reveal too much about their capabilities and that the Irani might share this knowledge with confrontation states such as Syria."The CIA document also flagged that Israel believes, despite repeated US statements to the contrary, that US strategic interests in the Gulf will lead Washington inexorably to mend fences with Iran. Israel sees Iran as the key to promoting its interests in the Gulf and hopes eventually to use its good offices to facilitate a rapprochement between Washington and Tehran. It may seem immensely ironic in today's context that Israel was hoping that it would use its covert ties with Iran to broker peace between the US and Iran. "According to the US Embassy, the Israelis also continue to believe, despite repeated US statements to the contrary, that US strategic interests in the Gulf will lead Washington inexorably to mend fences with Iran," the CIA document says. "Israel sees Iran as the key to promoting its interests in the Gulf and hopes eventually to use its good offices to facilitate a rapprochement between Washington and Tehran." Israel was also looking to buy oil from Iran in case the US and Iran mended CIA document said that Israel would continue supplying weapons to Iran but only secretly. "Israel is acutely aware of the US desire to punish the Khomeini regime and wants to avoid angering its patron," it said. "The Israelis are consequently unlikely to allow arms sales to expand to a point where they are no longer plausibly deniable. In the past, sensitivity to US concerns appears to have prevented Israel from selling Iran any major items such as tanks or aircraft." In the 1990s, the secret Iran-Israel alliance ended due to Iran's nuclear programme and the two countries turned into bitter enemies. Israel began viewing Iran's nuclear ambitions as an existential threat. Its pursuit of nuclear technology, despite its insistence on peaceful intentions, has prompted Israeli fears of a potential nuclear-armed adversary. Iran expanded its support to anti-Israel entities such as Hezbollah, Hamas and Houthis. By the 2020s, the rivalry between Iran and Israel had escalated into a shadow war, involving drone attacks, cyber warfare and maritime sabotage. Iran's increasing influence in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen has been matched by Israel's growing cooperation with Gulf states and continued military operations aimed at limiting Iranian entrenchment near its borders. The ongoing Gaza conflict and subsequent regional tensions, culminating in direct missile and drone exchanges in 2024, brought the Iran-Israel confrontation close to open warfare. Yesterday, the attack Israel has been vowing to mount on Iran for years finally happened and is likely to turn into a full-scale war.
Hindustan Times
28 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Meghalaya to strengthen resident safety law in wake of Sohra honeymoon murder
Shillong, In the wake of the sensational honeymoon murder in Sohra, the Meghalaya government on Friday decided to strengthen an existing legislation aimed at ensuring the safety of state residents and curbing the entry of criminal elements posing as tourists. The move comes weeks after the gruesome murder of Indore-based businessman Raja Raghuvanshi, who was killed during a honeymoon trip to Sohra, in a plot orchestrated by his wife and her lover. "The cabinet today decided to revisit the Meghalaya Resident Safety and Security Act , 2016, an existing state legislation, to add more teeth to this Act to minimise the possibility of criminal elements entering Meghalaya in the guise of tourists," Cabinet spokesperson Paul Lyngdoh said after the cabinet meeting here. "The government will soon come up with a formal proposal to further strengthen the MRSSA," he said. The 2016 Act was originally introduced to enhance the security of Meghalaya residents through the vetting of tenants and tourists. It allows for identity verification through a tourism-specific app and has provisions similar to those under the Inner Line Permit system, which the state has long been seeking from the Centre. According to Lyngdoh, the Assembly had adopted a resolution demanding implementation of the Inner Line Permit in Meghalaya. "The matter is pending before the Union Ministry of Home Affairs. There were several queries from the Ministry which the state government had addressed," he said, adding that the Union Ministry had expressed concern since Meghalaya is a transit state to other parts of the North East. The Cabinet minister also informed that the MRSSA is already a very effective legislation, which will need a little bit of "upscale" as of now. The urgency to revisit the Act was triggered by the case involving Sonam, the wife of murdered businessman Raja. She had allegedly conspired to kill her husband along with her lover and his friends, and entered Meghalaya under the guise of a tourist. According to Lyngdoh, the Cabinet placed on record its gratitude to the entire police department for cracking this case in record time and arresting all the accused, saving the state from a "bad name".
