Muslims across the country rally against amendments and restrictions, citing threats to religious autonomy and minority rights
Mohammad Alamullah | Clarion India
NEW DELHI – Opposition to the contentious Waqf Amendment Bill and the Chhattisgarh Waqf Board’s directive on pre-approving Friday sermons has intensified across the country. The measures have triggered widespread criticism from minority communities, legal experts, and political leaders, with concerns over religious freedom and state interference dominating the debate.
In West Bengal, hundreds of protesters convened in Kolkata’s Dharmatala area on Monday to voice their disapproval of the Waqf Bill. The demonstration, initially planned at Shaheed Minar Maidan but relocated to Rani Rashmi Road due to police restrictions, saw participation from multiple districts.
Prominent figures, including Ahmed Hassan Imran, Chairman of the West Bengal Minority Commission, and Maulana Abu Talib Rahmani, addressed the gathering. Both criticised the central government for undermining the autonomy of Waqf properties and minority rights.
“The Waqf Amendment Bill is not just an attack on our religious institutions but an affront to our constitutional rights,” declared Maulana Rahmani. “It seeks to centralise control, leaving our community vulnerable to bureaucratic exploitation.”
Imran echoed these sentiments, calling the bill a threat to India’s democratic ethos. “This is not just a Muslim issue; it is about safeguarding the democratic principles of our nation. Every citizen must realise how such laws erode fundamental freedoms,” he said.
Protesters carried placards with slogans such as “Protect Our Waqf, Protect Our Rights” and “Stop Interference in Religious Matters.” Organisers vowed to sustain their opposition through peaceful, democratic means.
Meanwhile, in BJP-ruled Chhattisgarh, the state Waqf Board’s new directive mandating pre-approval of Friday sermons has sparked outrage. The directive, aimed at curbing political discussions in mosques, has been criticised as a violation of constitutional freedoms.
Dr Salim Raj, Chairman of the Chhattisgarh Waqf Board, defended the move, arguing that it preserves the sanctity of mosques. “This directive ensures that mosques remain places of worship, not political arenas,” he said. “We urge imams to focus on Quranic teachings and leave politics to politicians. Our community cannot afford mosques being used for vote-bank politics.”
He cited past incidents in Jammu and Kashmir, where political rhetoric in sermons allegedly incited unrest, as the rationale behind the decision. “History teaches us that inflammatory statements during prayers can lead to violence. We want to ensure harmony,” he added.
To enforce compliance, the Waqf Board has established a WhatsApp group connecting 3,842 mosque custodians. Dr Raj warned of consequences for non-compliance, stating, “Mosques are for spiritual guidance, not for influencing electoral decisions. Misleading statements will not be tolerated.”
The directive has divided opinions within the Muslim community. While some believe it safeguards mosques from political misuse, others view it as an infringement on religious autonomy.
Local imam Maulana Shafiquddin criticised the directive, saying, “We have always delivered sermons based on Islamic teachings. This directive undermines our integrity and questions our intentions.”
Conversely, trustee Nizamuddin Ansari supported the measure, remarking, “In today’s polarised environment, ensuring that mosques remain apolitical is crucial. We need to focus on spirituality, not politics.”
The opposition Congress has fiercely condemned the directive. Chhattisgarh Congress spokesperson Sushil Anand Shukla called it “unconstitutional” and accused the BJP of politicising the Waqf Board. “The Waqf Board has exceeded its jurisdiction. Its primary role is to manage Waqf properties, not regulate sermons,” he said.
Shukla also questioned the BJP’s motives, asserting, “Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai must explain these restrictions. Is this part of a larger strategy to curtail minority rights under the guise of law and order?”
Legal experts have also raised concerns over the directive’s constitutionality. Advocate Faizan Ahmed, a constitutional law expert, explained, “The directive raises questions about the balance between religious freedom and state interference. While maintaining peace is a legitimate concern, imposing pre-approvals for sermons sets a worrying precedent.”
He suggested that legal challenges could follow. “If contested, the courts will need to decide whether this directive is a reasonable restriction under Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion,” he added.
The debates surrounding the Waqf Amendment Bill and the Chhattisgarh directive are part of a larger discourse on minority rights and state involvement in religious matters. Scholars and activists warn that such measures risk alienating minority communities and could exacerbate social divisions.
“These developments reflect a growing trend of state overreach into religious affairs,” commented sociologist Dr Nafisa Siddiqui. “This could erode trust between communities and the government.”
In West Bengal, protesters pledged to continue their resistance. Maulana Rahmani announced plans for nationwide demonstrations, stating, “This is just the beginning. We will take this fight to every corner of India until our voices are heard.”
