The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), which has been consistently supporting the controversial Waqf Amendment Bill, refuted the claim that the Bill aims to interfere in the religious matters of Muslims.

VHP chief Alok Kumar, in a candid interview with The Statesman, addressed the controversies surrounding the Bill and highlighted that the rise of Hindutava was bound to happen.

Advertisement

Excerpts from the interview:

Question: The Opposition alleged that the Bill is meant to take away the autonomy of Waqf properties. What is your stand, and the official position of the VHP on this issue?

Answer: We do not see any provision in the Bill that adversely affect the autonomy of the Waqf. There are sufficient safeguards in place, and the Union Home Minister also clarified this yesterday. The autonomy regarding the administration and functioning of Waqf remains intact.

Q: However, there is a debate on the Waqf properties. How does this Bill ensure that Muslims do not lose their properties given the concerns raised?

A: There are two key aspects to consider. First, for Waqf properties that are already registered and are not government-owned, their status remains unchanged. The Bill only seeks to address the cases where Waqf claims land that belongs to the state. In such cases, an inquiry will be held. If it is established that the property is not government-owned, the matter ends there. However, if the property is found to have been encroached upon public land, then it is only fair that the Waqf relinquishes its claim because no one has the right to donate government property to a private entity. This is the principle guiding the Bill.

Q: So, does this Bill impose government ownership on Waqf properties?

A: No. Except in cases where the state land has been mistakenly claimed as Waqf property. Otherwise, there is no interference in previously registered Waqf holdings. The Bill also clarifies that any future donations to Waqf must be made by individuals with a clear title to the property, accompanied by proper documentation, and the gift deed must be made public.

Q: Why then are leading Muslim organizations like Jamiat and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) opposing it?

A: Unfortunately, some organizations have developed a habit of interpreting every reform as anti-Muslim. The reality is that many Muslim communities, especially Pasmandas (the backwards) and others from economically weaker sections, have been denied benefits like education and economic upliftment. Instead of focusing on their welfare, these organizations engage in fear-mongering.

Q: Activists and academicians claim that this Bill aligns with the long-standing agenda of right-wing Hindu organizations like the VHP and the RSS. What is your response to this?

A: That is a baseless allegation. This is a reform that was needed in the Waqf system, and the VHP has no direct involvement in it. This is a matter between the Muslim community and the government. However, instead of debating the actual contents of the Bill, the discourse has been hijacked by political narratives.

Q: Could you highlight some of the non-controversial aspects of the Bill?

A: Yes. For instance, the Bill mandates that two women be included as members of the Waqf board, ensuring their participation in decision-making. It also guarantees the rights of female members in Waqf matters and stipulates that Waqf income should support divorced women, children, and destitute women. These are progressive steps towards gender empowerment, and no one should have an issue with them.

Q: Given the opposition to the Bill, is the VHP planning any outreach to convince the Muslim community?

A: Reforms should ideally come from within the Muslim community. Many Muslim organizations and leaders have welcomed these amendments. However, they often face internal pressures that prevent them from speaking freely. When the triple talaq issue was litigated, it was Muslim women who led the fight for their rights.

Q: Do you see a rising demand for reforms from within the Muslim community?

A: Yes, I believe so. The litigation against triple talaq was a clear indicator. For the first time, some Muslim women even defied family pressures to vote for the BJP in elections. This silent majority is growing but remains cautious due to fear.

Q: There is a perception that Hindutva has been rising with the rise of BJP in the past decade. Don’t you think this is polarizing the society?

A: It was bound to happen. Hindus form a significant majority in India and their voices are naturally being heard more now. However, the crucial question is whether this rise in Hindutva is against any other religion. The answer is no. We are not curtailing anyone’s rights; we are only opposing demands for special rights beyond constitutional equality.

Q: What about the ongoing Mandir-Masjid disputes? Don’t you think that this is dividing the society?

A: In Ayodhya, we fought for our legitimate claim. Currently, we are assisting litigations in Mathura and Kashi through legal means.

Q: RSS chief Dr. Mohan Bhagwat recently said that there is no need to look for a Shivling in every mosque. But we are still seeing such issues.

A: Dr Bhagwat rightly pointed out, we are not searching for a Shivling in every mosque. We are only identifying places where historical evidence supports our claims. At this stage, we are focused on Mathura and Kashi.

Q: Lastly, do you think there will be an internal revival within the Muslim community for reform?

A: Some voices are already emerging. The change may be slow, but it is inevitable. If a revival of Islamic principles based on peace and brotherhood is to happen, India will be at its forefront because of its cultural values.