Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray) MP Arvind Sawant strongly opposed the Waqf Amendment Bill, stating that if Balasaheb Thackeray was alive today, he would have voted against it.

Emphasizing that Balasaheb was never against Muslims but anti-social elements, he asserted that the Bill has played a significant role in uniting the Opposition’s INDIA alliance, strengthening their resolve to counter the ruling party’s policies.

Advertisement

Excerpts from the interview:

Question: Your party voted against the Bill. What are the specific provisions that you believe should not be supported?

Answer: One of the key issues is whether we believe in the democratic process or not. Previously, board members were elected by their own community. Now, elections have been stopped, and the government wants to appoint members through nomination.

Why does the government want to interfere? What is their interest? Essentially, it seems they want control over the resources and money. If there are wrongdoings or corruption, laws exist to take action. But why interfere in the democratic functioning of such institutions? If amendments are needed, we are open to discussing them.

Q: Why do you think inclusion of non-Muslims in the board is undemocratic?

A: Yes, they want two non-Muslim representatives, along with government officers, which will make the number of non-Muslim members greater than Muslim members on the board. Why? Who are they to decide who is a practicing Muslim?

What does “practicing” even mean? Do I have to visit a temple daily to prove my Hindu faith? This is not intelligence; it is interference.

Q: The government claims that there will be no interference in religious matters.

A: This is a clear interference! Faith is a personal matter. Religion is acquired by birth, so why define it further? Who decides this? If having a beard is the criterion, then even Imran Khan would not be considered Muslim.

Q: Your party chief, Uddhav Thackeray, has alleged that the BJP is using this as a ploy to grab land. Do you agree?

A: Absolutely, the BJP itself has mentioned in its manifestos – 2009, 2014 – that encroachments on Waqf lands will be removed and handed over to Muslims. What are they doing now? They are setting a narrative that under the pretext of protecting Waqf properties, they are grabbing them.

Q: But the government argues that its intention is to bring transparency.

A: Transparency? The same BJP that was against GST before 2014 and then implemented it? The same party that campaigned against Aadhaar and now promotes it. Their track record does not support their claims.

Q: If Balasaheb Thackeray were alive today, do you think he would have voted against the Bill?

A: Yes. You can take my words, Balasaheb Thackeray would’ve voted against the Bill. The perception created by the media is that he was against Muslims but he was not. He was against terrorists and anti-social elements. I say this on record he always stood for equality. He opposed the appeasement of any community but never discriminated.

Q: But Shiv Sena has always been seen as a pro-Hindu party. Was Balasaheb not against Congress?

A: Being against Congress doesn’t mean we were against everything. Did we not support Murli Deora? It was about principles, not blind opposition. He opposed appeasement politics and injustice against the majority, not minorities.

Q: Your party seems to have lost ground politically. Why is that?

A: That is a perception created by the media. When I became an MP, I met people from all backgrounds. Do you know Shabbir Sheikh? He was a minister in the Shiv Sena government. Muslims and Christians have been part of Shiv Sena for decades. The ruling party and media are setting a false narrative.

Q: So, you believe this is a narrative against your party…

A: Definitely! We have never been against any community. Our stance was always nationalistic – against anti-India activities. For example, during an India-Pakistan cricket match, if someone waves a Pakistani flag in India, we object to it. That’s patriotism, not communalism.

Q: Has your party’s ideology changed?

A: Not at all, we remain committed to Hindutva, but we were never anti-Muslim. It is a false narrative to suggest otherwise.

Q: What is the current status of the INDIA alliance? Is it still intact?

A: You saw the Parliament vote – INDIA alliance is intact. We may have local elections with different strategies, but at the national level, we stand together to protect the Constitution.

Q: Has this Bill brought the INDIA alliance closer?

A: Yes, it has strengthened our unity on principles. We are united whenever the Constitution is under threat.

Q: Who do you think can lead the INDIA alliance?

A: India has no dearth of talent. Did people ever think who would replace Modi before he became the PM? Leadership will emerge when the time comes. Ask the BJP who will lead after Modi, and then we can answer about the INDIA alliance.