Latest news with #KhalidSaifullahRahmani
The Hindu
3 days ago
- General
- The Hindu
Muslim Personal Law Board will not make Waqf Act an election issue but will take a call to intensify protests
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has been organising demonstrations to protest against the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 in several parts of the country, including in Hyderabad, for several weeks. The Board has sought to include women, and people belonging to other faiths in the protests, even as its president Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, in an exclusive interview with Syed Mohammed, asserts that their struggle is not against Hindus, but against the government which is trying to wrest lands and properties from the control of Muslims. Edited excerpts from an interview: Q: What are your key contentions against the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025? It is our belief that the law was brought to grab the properties of Muslims. The law makes waqf properties vulnerable. The concept of waqf by user —meaning properties that have been historically used as mosques, dargahs, graveyards or madrasas — that are being used for a specific purpose, even if no documents are available, they will be considered waqf. Religious structures often predate documentation. For example, Delhi's Jama Masjid and Hyderabad's Mecca Masjid were built centuries ago. If masjid committees are now expected to produce ownership documents, it sets an impossible standard. As regards claims by the government, we believe they have a habit of lying. They can claim any land parcel. Most waqf cases are against the government. So, all waqf cases that are against the government will become disputed. Similarly, disputes were created over other Muslim places of worship, and to create them one does not need evidence. Second, the amendment says that any waqf property under the custody of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) will no longer be considered waqf. Many historic mosques that serve both religious and public, as sites of tourism, interests may now function only at the government's discretion, depending on whether and at what frequency they permit namaz (prayers). Thirdly, the law seeks to dilute protection under the law of limitation. Thousands of acres will stand risk of exclusion from waqf (due to adverse possession). Many land parcels are in unauthorised possession of the government, of Hindus and even Muslims. Given the BJP's usual firmness in passing laws, how do you plan to engage the public? Demonstrations such as 'lights off' and 'human chain' were largely symbolic. Will future protests take a different form? It's true that the BJP rarely backtracks. It believes in dictatorship. It does not listen to the public. As seen with the farm laws, these were withdrawn after several farmers died. The AIMPLB's protests will be within the bounds of law. They will be peaceful. Our fight is not against our Hindu brothers but against this government. If the government remains indifferent, our working committee will decide the next course. Whether it is courting arrest, a jail bharo movement, or peaceful roadblocks. We're encouraged by the support of many Hindu brothers, and civil rights groups who stand with us. Q: The BJP claims this law will ensure transparency and empower Muslim women. How do you respond to these claims? We say that let there be a public debate. Let the Prime Minister or Home Minister attend. We'll welcome them. If that's not possible, send the Law or Minority Affairs Minister to sit with an AIMPLB delegation. Let them explain how this law benefits Muslims, women, or Pasmandas. They won't be able to. They claim Pasmandas are being denied rights. Are they not praying in masjids, which are waqf? In Islam, all Muslims are equal. Q: But caste-based discrimination among Muslims, as is the case with Pasmandas, has been studied and documented. Those who are victims of discrimination know what they've been through. Yes, there are two aspects — economic and social. Economically, Muslims are among the most backward, as various government-appointed commissions have found. Socially, some refer to Ashraf, Ajlaf, and Arzal. But these words are not found in any Islamic texts on jurisprudence. In Islam, a Syed girl can marry a non-Syed man, and no aalim will declare the nikah invalid. If the imam of a masjid is an Ansari, whom some may look down upon, but we do not, a Syed will still pray behind him. It is possible that these negative practices have entered the Muslim community on account of shared experiences, or influences from others. But Islam rejects caste. We look at it as a social evil. Q: The government has contended in courts of law, including in the case of waqf, that of 'essential religious' practice. The government is presenting this in a wrong manner. Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) should not be interpreted by the government. The opinion of those who are experts of fiqh should be taken. Essential religious practice encompasses all that is proved by Quran and hadith (tradition of Prophet Muhammad). What ramification will Act have, especially when it comes to States that are soon going for elections as is the case with Bihar? AIMPLB does not have anything to do with politics. We neither support, or oppose any party. We will not make this an election issue.. As regards one party supporting (the then Bill), or another opposing it, it is unfortunate many political leaders do not have a conscience. The AIMPLB has stressed on unity among faiths as regards demonstrations, and called upon varied groups to fight against the Act. If you see, a Jain temple was demolished recently in Mumbai. Secondly Buddhists in Bodh Gaya have been demonstrating. They want members of their own faiths in the management. The problem will exacerbate. It began with minorities, including Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs. In fact, I am certain that it will eventually affect Hindus as well.
Time of India
28-04-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Waqf Amendment Bill violates Constitution, says AIMPLB
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: Members of All India Muslim Personal Law Board ( AIMPLB ) said on Monday that the newly introduced Waqf Amendment Bill were contradictory to Articles 14, 25, 26, and 30 of the Constitution. They said the amendments were discriminatory and infringed upon fundamental rights of Muslims. The meeting was attended by some prominent figures of AIMPLB such as Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, Maulana Fazal ur Rahman Mujaddi, Dr Qasun Rasul Ilyas, Barrister Asaduddin Owaisi, Maulana Yaseen Usmani Badayuni, Maulana Moizuddin Qasmi, and Maulana Ilyas Khan Falahi. In a statement issued after the meeting, the board stated that the ruling BJP, using its numerical strength, passed arbitrary and discriminatory amendments to the Waqf Act against the will of crores of Muslims, minorities, and justice-loving citizens. "We totally reject these amendments, which trample upon the constitutional and fundamental rights of the country's largest minority," the statement read. The board asserted that the amendments violate the fundamental rights under Articles 25 and 26, which guarantee freedom of conscience, the right to practise and propagate religion, and the right to establish and manage institutions for religious and charitable purposes. The new provisions, they said, prevent Muslims from managing their religious Waqfs independently and expose the govt's intent to control Waqf administration. Further, AIMPLB pointed out that the amendment requiring a waqif (endower) to be a practising Muslim for five years contradicts Articles 14 and 26 of the Constitution and Islamic Shariah principles. "These amendments are discriminatory and deny Muslims the rights and protections afforded to Waqf properties of other religious communities like Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, and Buddhists," the board stated. The board mentioned that despite making oral and written representations to the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) and the efforts of around five crore Muslims who sent emails opposing the changes, the amendments were passed in violation of parliamentary and democratic norms. AIMPLB has now challenged the amendments in the Supreme Court and announced a three-month-long peaceful protest movement across the country. "Our state committee has prepared a comprehensive plan to ensure the movement remains within the constitutional and legal framework," the board added. |
