Dr. Khan suggested that an international institution specialising in archaeological surveys could instill more confidence.
Mohammad Alamullah | Clarion India
NEW DELHI — Noted Islamic scholar and former president of the All India Muslim Majlis-e Mushawarat (AIMMM), Dr. Zafarul Islam Khan, has weighed in on the ongoing debate surrounding the Gyanvapi Masjid, expressing concern over the political dimensions surrounding Muslim religious sites in India.
Dr. Khan, who also served as chairman of Delhi Minorities Commission, asserted that the issues of Kashi and Mathura mosques are being raked up now that the Ram Mandir, built on the site of the Babri Masjid, has become a reality.
In an exclusive chat with Clarion India on Tuesday, Dr. Khan questioned the legitimacy of recent court-approved surveys, excavations, and report preparations, labelling them as illegal activities conducted without proper legal cover.
According to Dr. Khan, the credibility of the surveys in Ayodhya and Varanasi, and the potential future exploration in Mathura is dubious. He criticised the perceived bias of individuals appointed for these tasks, suggesting that they receive political directives to shape the narrative in a particular way. He emphasises that such actions are aimed at subjugating the Muslim community. He raised doubts over accuracy and the scientific basis of these activities.
Dr. Khan suggested that an international institution specialising in archaeological surveys could instil more confidence. Emphasising the illegality of the present endeavours, the scholar stressed that no state, particularly a court of law, should engage in unauthorised activities. He referred to the existing law enacted in 1990 that safeguards religious places, excluding Babri Masjid, as they stood at the time of independence in 1947.
“This law is the law of the land today as the Parliament has not made any amendments to it,” he said adding that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has the power to amend this law allowing surveys and interventions by courts. But he has not taken any step in this direction. “Until changes are made, the current law protects the status of all places of religious worship as they were on August 15, 1947.”
The scholar questioned the permissions granted by courts for surveys, excavations, and reports, deeming such actions illegal. He suggested that such demands would be dismissed by any court abroad.
He said that the ongoing actions, conducted in violation of the law, are inherently wrong and politically motivated. Dr. Khan highlighted the unresolved issues of Kashi and Mathura mosques for the last 40 years or more. These demands received support in the wake of the BJP’s victory in 2014.
Dr. Khan said while the Supreme Court acknowledged the fairness of the Muslim case at every stage, yet it gave the land to the Hindu party in Ayodhya. As such this decision was political, not legal. He also questioned the legitimacy of the Supreme Court verdict due to the absence of the signatures of the judges on the document.
Dr. Khan delved into the political nature of recent decisions surrounding religious sites, which imply political motives rather than a fair and just legal process. He warned that under the current trend, the “legal” targeting of Muslim places of worship shall continue for a thousand years. “New claims will be made once old ones are settled,” he said.
Dr. Khan questioned the inauguration of an incomplete temple and said the refusal of the Shankaracharyas, the top Hindu pontiffs, to take part in the inaugural ceremony, is ominous. The government’s extensive promotion of the event, he said, goes against the secular nature of the state; it denotes a political agenda.
Dr. Khan also pointed to the law of limitation which does not allow legal cases against adverse occupation of a property after the passage of 15 years. Then, he asked, how Hindu parties can be allowed to make claims on mosques after hundreds of years of their existence. This activity, condoned by the government, is clearly part of the programme to transform India into a Hindu nation, he said.
