Controversy Over New Waqf Law Sparks Political Tensions in Bihar

The political activities surrounding the new Muslim Waqf Board legislation are not beneficial for the nation. This law was made by the Modi government this year by passing a bill in the Parliament. To protest against this, a rally was organized yesterday at Gandhi Maidan in Patna, the capital of Bihar. This rally was organized by the Muslim organization 'Imarat Sharia'. It was supported directly and indirectly by the major opposition parties. After the Ministry of Defense and Railways, the Board has the maximum land in India, about nine lakh acres. The question is whether people of only one religion can be authorized to manage such a large property and estate in secular India? The government has made such provisions in the new law that non-Muslim ex-officio persons can also be kept in the administration of the Waqf Board. For example, if the District Magistrate of a district is a non-Muslim, then he will be the head of the people appointed in the Board to take care of the Waqf properties in the district.

What objection can any Muslim citizen have in this? But the sentiments expressed by various speakers in the Patna rally yesterday cannot be said to be in the interest of India's unity. But above all, the biggest question is that in 1947, when India was divided into two parts only on the basis of religion, then whose land was that? The entire land of Pakistan also belonged to India and Indians at that time. So, on what basis did Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the creator of Pakistan, create Pakistan? In this connection, it is a historical fact that in the 40s, when Jinnah's Muslim League launched a campaign to create a separate Pakistan for Muslims, a proposal came that a referendum or plebiscite should be held on this issue. Mahatma Gandhi was ready for this but his condition was that all Hindus and Muslims should be included in the referendum. But Jinnah wanted that the referendum should be held only among Muslim citizens. Mahatma Gandhi was not ready for this under any circumstances.

So the option of referendum ended and the British conspired with Jinnah and created Pakistan by dividing the Muslim-majority states of Punjab and Bengal. What is there in the Muslim Waqf Board Amendment Act that is getting the support of the coalition of opposition parties? Secularism can never be one-sided. In 1954, the first Prime Minister Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru formed the board and it was amended from time to time, but the amendment made during the rule of PV Narasimha Rao gave the Waqf Board the right to declare any land as Waqf land. Narasimha Rao amended this law when the Babri Masjid was demolished in Ayodhya in 1992. This was done with the aim of garnering the sympathy of Muslims towards him. I am not going into its technical legal aspects, but I want to say that this law had become one-sided. Later, some amendments were also made in this law during the tenure of Dr. Manmohan Singh's second government. The question is who owns the entire land of India? This land belongs to the people of India, which is managed by the governments elected by them.

But assembly elections are going to be held in Bihar in the coming November and the number of Muslim voters here is quite high, so keeping in view the electoral equations, various political parties are busy laying their own chessboard. Tejashwi Yadav, leader of Bihar's major regional political party Rashtriya Janata Dal, even said in a rally at Gandhi Maidan that if his coalition government comes to power after the elections, he will throw this law in the dustbin. By saying this, the former Deputy Chief Minister of the state has only committed contempt of Parliament because both the houses of Parliament have made the new law with majority and while passing the related bill, there was a full debate in the Rajya Sabha as well.

The main function of the Waqf Board is to make good use of the land donated in the name of Allah in the interest of the society, but on the contrary, some people have occupied the Waqf lands like mafia. Therefore, the parties going against the new Waqf law will have to think whether the work they are doing will not promote religious polarization? Hindus and Muslims are citizens of India and all have equal rights. But in Bihar, the vote bank of Shri Lalu Yadav's party is considered to be the Muslim-Yadav alliance. Therefore, it can be easily understood what is the intention of his son Tejaswi Yadav. He is doing this only to keep his core vote bank intact. In the last assembly elections, Shri Lalu Yadav's party had only one more seat than the BJP. In addition to this, elections in Bihar are predominantly contested along caste lines. However, is it possible to ignore the one-sided resistance to the Waqf Board Act without any repercussions?