The incident of burning the book "Manusmriti" is one of the most significant symbolic events in the history of social movements in India. Although burning any book, regardless of its content, is inherently an act that is rejected and counters values of tolerance and freedom of expression, this act gained strong symbolic meanings when carried out by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar on December 25, 1927, in protest against the social oppression and class discrimination that this book embodies. So, what is the book "Manusmriti," why was this method chosen for the protest, and what messages did the protesters aim to convey?

The Laws of Manu

"Manusmriti," also known as the "Laws of Manu," is one of the ancient Hindu texts that established a strict legal and social framework to organize the lives of the Hindu community. This text is attributed to Sage Manu, who is considered the first lawgiver in India and regarded in Hinduism as "the father of mankind." Manu is the first to lay down the laws that govern society according to Indian traditions, prominently appearing in ancient texts like the Rigveda and the Mahabharata Purana, but most notably associated with the text "Manusmriti."

This book defines the duties and rights for each class within Hindu society, starting from the Brahmins (the priestly class) to the Shudras (the lower classes) and the Dalits, who have been described as "the untouchables." Critics argue that the text justifies and establishes the dominance of the upper classes (Brahmins) over the rest of society, legitimizing the enslavement of lower classes.

 A Protest Step

On December 25, 1927, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, one of the prominent leaders of the Dalits and the architect of the Indian Constitution, burned a copy of "Manusmriti" during a large public assembly. Although book burning is a controversial and unacceptable act under normal circumstances, Ambedkar's choice of this method carried deep symbolic meanings. This act was a symbolic expression of rejection of the caste system that affects millions of marginalized people in India.

Ambedkar saw this text not merely as a religious or philosophical book, but as an intellectual and legislative foundation for a social system based on discrimination and enslavement, embodying the persecution practiced by the upper classes over the lower classes, and an ideological tool to justify this oppression.

The book presents a stringent vision dividing society into four main classes (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras), known as the "Varna system," placing the Dalit class or "untouchables" outside this system. Thus, the book classified a large portion of Indian society as the lowest level in the social hierarchy, depriving them of basic rights.

The book described Dalits as less than human, unworthy of education or engaging in occupations deemed respectable by society. According to this text, they were even prohibited from approaching Brahmins or touching their belongings for fear of defilement. The jobs designated for Dalits were menial in nature, such as cleaning streets, removing waste, and carrying the dead, and they were not permitted to change this status or improve their situation, leading to the inheritance of oppression across generations.

 The Inferiority of Women

The "Manusmriti" places women in a subordinate position to men throughout their lives, stating that a woman must be under the guardianship of her father during childhood, her husband after marriage, and her sons after her husband's death. The book deprives women of any economic, social, or intellectual independence, considering them as beings incapable of making decisions on their own. It stipulates that a woman should serve her husband and endure any mistreatment from him without complaint, thereby legitimizing domestic violence against her. Furthermore, the book restricts a woman's role in society merely as a tool for reproduction, giving her no significant standing in public or religious spheres.

Ambedkar realized that any change in Indian society must include the liberation of women from this oppressive system. He worked to promote women's rights in education, employment, and participation in public life, emphasizing that the "Manusmriti" was a major obstacle to achieving these goals. Ambedkar considered that discrimination against women is not merely a gender issue but part of a broader system that perpetuates social and economic oppression.

 Slavery in the "Manusmriti"

The text contains explicit instructions calling for the subjugation of the lower classes by the upper classes, who are viewed as eternal servants expected to provide their services to the Brahmins and Kshatriyas without complaint or grievance. According to the text, the relationship between the upper and lower classes is one of control and submission, where the lower classes are considered private property of the upper classes and can be exploited in any way without any obligation to provide something in return.

Ambedkar argued that the social slavery legitimized by the "Manusmriti" is the foundation upon which all other forms of discrimination are built; this system has led to the destruction of opportunities for the lower classes in education, employment, and social advancement. He saw this oppression as not merely a legal or social issue but also a moral one that requires a comprehensive review of the values upon which traditional societies in India are established.

 Book Burning is an Unacceptable Act

In academic and intellectual circles, book burning is generally considered an unacceptable act as it contradicts the values of dialogue and intellectual debate. Even books that contain rejected ideas should be responded to with criticism and refutation, not with burning. However, those who burn the book justify their actions by stating that the protest emphasizes the importance of building a society based on equality, as dreamed of by Ambedkar, where everyone lives with dignity and respect. They see it as a call to end all forms of class and gender discrimination in Indian society and as a clear message rejecting ideas that promote class and gender discrimination, establishing the dominance of a certain group at the expense of the majority.

In conclusion, the burning of the "Manusmriti," though a controversial act, served as a declaration of rebellion against an unjust social system and a clear message rejecting ideas that legitimize class and gender discrimination. Despite the debate surrounding this step, the symbolism of this act lies in the call for a just society that respects humanity regardless of class or gender. Ambedkar's vision transcended symbolic protest to the construction of a new society based on the principles of freedom and dignity, a dream that continues to inspire millions in India and beyond.

--------------
Read the article in Arabic

We have often heard about the persecution practiced by successive Indian governments against Indian Muslims. This discrimination and persecution take various forms, and Indian Muslims continue to live under the pressure of Hindu discrimination, which relentlessly tries to strip them of their rights by all means, both legitimate and illegitimate.

Among the forms of persecution recently faced by Muslims in India is the phenomenon observed by human rights activists and those concerned with minority rights. This is the phenomenon of discrimination against Indian Muslims when applying for jobs to find employment through which a Muslim can support their family and meet their needs. The reasons for the Indian government's discrimination in employment matters specifically against Muslims are varied, with the most prominent being:

1. The Spread of “Islamophobia” and Social Biases:

Upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the increasing “Islamophobia” in many non-Muslim societies significantly contributes to employment discrimination against Muslims. This phobia helps create negative perceptions of Muslims, such as being less loyal to the state or more associated with violence and extremism, as propagated by Hindus about Muslims in society. These distorted images negatively impact Muslims' job opportunities, and these biases easily find their way into hiring decisions, whether in the government or private sector.

2. Exaggerated Nationalism:

The malicious effects of nationalism have left Muslims with little break to ensure a basic standard of living. Under nationalist governments that aim to reinforce the dominant religious identity, policies are directed in ways that increase discrimination against Muslims. For instance, calls to boycott Muslim-run businesses or questioning their national loyalty lead to their indirect exclusion from the job market. These practices bear fruit in the absence of legal oversight to protect minority rights as enshrined in the constitution and international treaties.

3. Lack of Support and Equality:

Ensuring a decent living for minorities minimally requires the provision of social and professional support, alongside equality with other societal groups, especially on the professional level.

However, the reality in India is quite the opposite. Muslims often lack professional support networks that could help them secure job opportunities. Many jobs rely on personal relationships and social networks, which may be unavailable or weak in Muslim communities due to deliberate marginalization. Furthermore, policies aimed at promoting diversity and equality do not always include religious minorities, clearly affecting Indian Muslims.

From this perspective, it becomes evident that employment discrimination against Muslims is a significant challenge that must be addressed promptly and decisively. This can be done by strengthening laws that grant them the right to work according to their available skills, increasing awareness about the importance of integrating them into society to achieve desired development, and adopting inclusive employment policies that create a fair and diverse work environment, giving everyone an equal opportunity to grow and succeed.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Read the Article in Arabic

What happened to Bangladesh in 1970 and the subsequent events were merely a continuation of the conspiracy to fragment India and disperse its Muslims. India, which accounted for a quarter of the world's economy (24.4%) ⁽¹⁾ before the British occupation, was never expected by the British colonialists to remain unified after they were forced to withdraw following World War II. The Muslims were the target of the division and fragmentation of greater India, as they would inevitably have returned to rule a unified India in the first free elections. Even the Punjab region was divided into two parts before India's independence.

The First Partition

“Divide and conquer” is a malicious old imperial British policy based on division and fragmentation, fostering enmity and discord among people. The partition of the Bengal region (Bangladesh), which was one of the largest Muslim concentrations in India at the time, began in the early 20th century, more than 40 years before India's independence. This was because Muslims in India never ceased their resistance to British colonialism since they were afflicted by it with the arrival of the British East India Company to the subcontinent. The first partition of the Bengal region occurred in 1905, separating the eastern areas from the western ones. However, this decision exacerbated nationalist sentiments, prompting Britain to reverse it in 1911.

Britain did not forget that this region (Bangladesh) should be divided, so when independence and the separation of Pakistan occurred, they decided to revive the old division of the region, separating the western part from the eastern one, allowing only East Bengal to join the newly formed state of Pakistan.

Planning the Separation of East Pakistan from West Pakistan

The planning to separate East Pakistan (Bangladesh) from unified Pakistan began immediately after its independence. The Awami League party and its leader were among the main tools of separation. There is no doubt that the failed Pakistani administration contributed to fueling the conflict between the two parts of Pakistan. The conspirators exploited economic disparities, linguistic and cultural differences, and political repression to ignite the separatist tendency among the Bengalis.

In the 1950s and 1960s, East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) witnessed several attempts and movements aiming to separate from West Pakistan. Here are some notable events from that period:

1. Bengali Language Movement:

The Bengali Language Movement, also known as “Bhasha Andolon,” was a significant political movement in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) during the 1950s. The movement demanded the recognition of the Bengali language as an official language alongside Urdu in Pakistan.

The movement began in the late 1940s, after the partition of India, when the Pakistani government led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah issued an oppressive decision to make Urdu the only official language of the country, disregarding the tens of millions who spoke Bengali. This decision inevitably angered the Bengalis, who formed the majority.

On February 21, 1952, students and political activists organized widespread protests in Dhaka, demanding the recognition of the Bengali language. Many students were killed during these protests. After years of protests and pressure, the Pakistani government relented and announced in 1956 that Bengali would be an official language alongside Urdu.

Thus, the Bengali Language Movement was a turning point in the history of East Pakistan, contributing to the strengthening of Bengali national identity and eventually leading to the independence movement in 1971. ⁽²⁾

2. 1954 Elections in East Pakistan:

The 1954 elections in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) were a critical moment in the history of the nascent state. These elections saw a significant rise in Bengali nationalist sentiments, laying the foundation for a prolonged struggle for independence.

The results of these elections saw the rise of Bengali nationalism and a rejection of the dominance of West Pakistan. The election results marked the beginning of a deep political crisis between East and West Pakistan, exacerbated by the refusal of the West Pakistani elite to recognize the legitimacy of the elections and their failure to implement promises of autonomy. ⁽³⁾

3. Six-Point Program of 1966:

The Six-Point Program was a political plan presented by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, leader of the Awami League, in 1966. The stated aim of the program was to achieve extensive autonomy for East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) within the framework of a unified Pakistan. However, a quick review of the “Six Points” shows that it aimed for complete separation. The points were as follows: ⁽⁴⁾

First: Almost complete autonomy.

Second: Complete control of Bangladesh over its economic resources, including taxes.

Third: Complete control over foreign trade.

Fourth: A separate currency for Bangladesh.

Fifth: A separate armed force for Bangladesh to maintain security.

Sixth: Control over foreign affairs.

These were demands for complete separation, not just autonomy, as the drafters claimed!

4. 1970 Elections: The Straw that Broke the Camel's Back:

In the 1970 elections, the Awami League won a landslide victory, giving it the right to form the government. However, the central government in West Pakistan, led by General Yahya Khan, refused to recognize these results. This was a golden opportunity seized by India, which was waiting for Pakistan to stumble, and by Bengali separatists.

The Awami League party, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, managed to achieve its separatist goal. However, the political entity that emerged—named Bangladesh—was politically flawed from its inception. Since then, Bangladesh has lived in poor political, economic, and environmental conditions. The country has not experienced stable democracy to this day. Dictatorship began under the state's founder, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman himself, who consolidated absolute power, declared a state of emergency, persecuted political opponents, implemented extreme socialist secularism, and abolished all parties except his own. He was overthrown by the military in a 1975 coup, during which he and all his family members, except two daughters, were killed. One of the surviving daughters, Sheikh Hasina Wazed, was in Germany at the time.

-------------------------------------------------------------

1. https://www.eh-exhibition.uni-bayreuth.de/en/Statistical-Tools11/index.html.
2. M، A، Goni, The Bengali Language Movement: History and Ideology (Dhaka, 2006).
3. S، Sinha, Pakistan’s General Elections, 1954 (Dhaka, 1980).
4. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, The Six Point Programme (Dhaka, 1966).

Read the Article in Arabic

Islam reached Bengal (now Bangladesh) through Arab traders and preachers in the 8^th century CE. It is believed that the first mosque in Bengal was built in Gour, now located in West Bengal, during the Delhi Sultanate era (1206-1320 CE). Islam quickly spread in Bengal under the rule of the Delhi Sultanate and the Bengal Sultanate (1352-1576 CE), and today, Muslims constitute more than 90% of the country's population.

There is material evidence of Islam's arrival in Bangladesh in the first century AH. In Kurigram district, remnants of an old mosque and Islamic inscriptions dated to 69 AH were found. Additionally, a coin bearing the name of the Abbasid Caliph Harun al-Rashid dated to 172 AH was discovered in Paharpur, Rajshahi district, and another coin in the name of one of his successors, Abu Ahmad Abdullah al-Mustansir Billah, was found in Mainamati, Comilla district. ⁽¹⁾

A Prominent Location with Abundant Resources

Bangladesh today is a relatively small country in South Asia but densely populated. It is bordered by India to the west, north, and east, and Myanmar (Burma) to the southeast. The total area of the country is 148,460 square kilometers, with a population exceeding 171 million. Bangladesh has the highest number of rivers per square kilometer in the world. According to the Ministry of Environment and Forests in Bangladesh, there are approximately 230 rivers in the country: 7 major rivers, 80 medium-sized rivers, and 149 small rivers, ⁽²⁾ with over 15% of its land covered by forests.

Bangladesh is a major producer of jute, sugarcane, and cotton, with an annual production exceeding 1.5 million metric tons of jute and 2.5 million metric tons of cotton. ⁽³⁾ It is also a leading tea producer, with an annual production of over 60 million kilograms. ⁽⁴⁾

The Partition of Bengal

Until 1858, Bengal was a single province. However, in an effort to divide the region, Britain partitioned it in 1905 into East Bengal (now Bangladesh) and West Bengal (a province in present-day India, covering 88,752 square kilometers). During the British colony, Bangladesh experienced significant economic, social, and cultural changes. The Bengali language and culture were suppressed, and British administrators imposed Western-style educational and administrative systems.

The decision to partition Bengal into western and eastern regions in 1905 led to a revolution due to rising nationalist sentiments, prompting Britain to reverse the decision in 1911. However, West Bengal was separated again in 1947, but this time for good, when India was partitioned into two states, India and Pakistan.

The Grand Conspiracy

The scenario of Britain's exit from India was clear as the British Empire handed over the reins to the American Empire. It was also evident that Britain could not leave a country like India, where Muslims formed a majority and wielded significant influence. Hence, plans were made to isolate Muslims from the rest of the country, under the pretense of independence.

Muslims were aware of this grand scheme, but Britain had prepared scenarios for separation: engineered sectarian strife, premeditated massacres of Muslims, and agents to deceive the Muslim masses into believing that separation was the solution. And so it was.

Muslims in the Indian subcontinent number nearly half of the population, making up over 30% of the world's Muslim population. This large concentration of Muslims necessitated a diabolical plan to detach India from the Islamic world and scatter Indian Muslims across several countries under the pretext of independence.

Wise Muslim leaders and scholars were against the partition. The Deobandi school of thought's Muslims criticized the idea of creating Pakistan, viewing it as a conspiracy by the colonial government to prevent the establishment of a strong, unified Indian state. They helped organize the All India Azad Muslim Conference ⁽⁵⁾ and argued that the economic development of Muslims would suffer if India were divided. They saw the partition as a design to keep Muslims behind.

However, Britain had prepared Muhammad Ali Jinnah, an Ismaili, to deceive the Muslim masses who were facing an engineered sectarian civil war fueled by Britain. Pakistan separated from India, initially including Bangladesh as East Pakistan.

The Separation of Pakistan from India

In 1947, Pakistan was formed, led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, an Ismaili, as the head of state, and Liaquat Ali Khan, a Shia, as prime minister. Liaquat Ali, a long-time British loyalist along with his family before him, held various ministerial positions in British India, including defense and finance, and served as the Minister of Commonwealth and Kashmir Affairs in 1940, before India's independence.

The policies of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan sowed the seeds of separation. They insisted on imposing the Urdu language on Bangladesh and marginalizing the Bengali language. Despite constituting 55% of the state's population, Bangladesh had limited representation in the Pakistani government. This was coupled with stark economic disparities and the dominance of the Western part of the country (current Pakistan) over the entire state.

The Separation of Bangladesh

On December 7, 1970, the Awami League, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, won a grand victory in the Pakistani general elections, securing 167 out of 169 seats. Bangladesh, which was called eastern Pakistan, was a part of the united Pakistan. Therefore, this victory guaranteed his party the right to form the government of united Pakistan. However, the central government in Pakistan, led by General Yahya Khan, had other plans.

General Yahya Khan, who became the President of Pakistan, refused to allow Mujibur Rahman to form the government, which became the tipping point. Massive demonstrations erupted in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), demanding separation. After failed negotiations to resolve the constitutional crisis, Mujibur Rahman, supported by India, declared the independence of Bangladesh on March 26, 1971.

In December 1971, India intervened militarily, occupying Bangladesh and handing it over to Mujibur Rahman as the first Prime Minister of Bangladesh. But did Bangladesh then move from hardship to the promised prosperity under the Awami League led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman?

-------------------------------------------------------------

1. Islam in the Bengal region and present-day Bangladesh, Muhammad Fazlur Rahman, Article published in Al-Majalla Al-Arabia, Vol. 6, p.3, 2001, Arabic Department, Dhaka University, Bangladesh.
2. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of Bangladesh, 2020, Rivers of Bangladesh.
3. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (2020).
4. Ibid, Agricultural Statistics in Bangladesh (2020).
5. The Indian Year Book, Bennett, Coleman & Company, 1942, p. 866.

Read the Article in Arabic

The Indian government recently announced proposed amendments to the Waqf Act, 1995, which deals with the management of religious and charitable assets of Muslims, such as mosques, schools and shrines. The bill has not yet been passed but has been sent to a parliamentary committee.

JPC and the Oppositions

The first meeting of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, on Thursday, August 22, 2024, witnessed occasional heated exchanges as opposition parties that had recently opposed the bill in the House of Representatives stuck to their positions and questioned several proposed provisions in the bill. The committee’s chairman, Jagdambika Pal, described the meeting as fruitful.

History of Waqf in India

The Waqf system in India dates back to the Islamic era, when rulers such as Firoz Shah Tughluq endowed lands for the benefit of the community. This system continued under the patronage of rulers such as Sher Shah Suri and the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, who allocated lands for religious and charitable purposes. With the advent of British colonialism, Waqf was subjected to illegal exploitation, as many Islamic schools were closed and Waqf assets were seized. This exploitation led to widespread protests by Muslims, which prompted the issuance of the first Waqf Protection Act in 1923.

Several Amendments to the Waqf Act

Subsequently, India witnessed several amendments to the Waqf Act. In 1954, the Waqf Act was passed for the first time by Parliament. Over time, this Act was repealed and a new Waqf Act was adopted in 1995, which gave Waqf Boards more powers to enhance their role in protecting Waqf properties. In 2013, further amendments were made to the Act; What gave the Waqf Board the power to designate the properties donated by people as Waqf properties, and since then, it has become known that the properties that are donated always become part of the Waqf Board’s property.

 Waqf Board of India

According to government figures, the Waqf Board of India owns more than 872,000 acres of land, making it the third largest landowner in India after the Railways and the Ministry of Defence. There are 32 Waqf Boards in India spread across various states, including Shia and Sunni boards.

However, despite this large amount of property, the Waqf Board suffers from weak revenue generation, as it generates an income of only about 200 crore rupees annually. This has drawn widespread criticism from Muslim organisations, which have called for the need to improve transparency in the management of Waqfs and increase the efficiency in investing these assets in the service of society.

Proposed amendments and their impact

The new law of 2024, which the government is seeking to pass, raises many concerns, and represents a serious threat to the independence of Islamic Waqfs in India and exposes them to exploitation by governments; This may lead to a reduction in the number of endowments and the loss of Muslims’ endowed properties. This law directly affects the Muslim community and reflects the government’s intention to undermine the role of endowments without considering Islamic principles or consulting the relevant authorities.

Most Important Amendments

- Inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf Boards: One of the most prominent amendments that is considered a violation of the privacy of Islamic Waqf is allowing non-Muslim members to hold leadership positions in Waqf Boards. This amendment raises concerns about preserving the religious character of Waqf.

- Government control over the use of Waqf: Under the new law, the government will be the body that decides how to use Waqf lands. This contradicts the Sharia principles that stipulate respecting the conditions of the donors, which is considered a clear infringement on the freedom to dispose of Waqf according to Sharia.

- New conditions on who can Waqf: The new law imposes conditions on who can Waqf, including a condition that 5 years have passed since the person converted to Islam before he is allowed to Waqf. This condition contradicts the freedom to practice worship and places unjustified restrictions on new Muslims.

- Requirement of official registration of Waqf: The new law stipulates that lands that are not officially registered will not be considered Waqf. This condition threatens to lose many historical Waqfs that may not have been officially registered but were considered Waqf from a legal perspective for centuries.

– Restricting the endowment to one-third: The law restricts individuals who wish to endow all of their property by allowing them to endow only one-third of it. This restriction contradicts Islamic law, which gives the individual the right to dispose of his property as he wishes, including endowing it in its entirety if he so desires.

– Transferring the authority of disputes to the government: The resolution of endowment disputes will be transferred from the courts to local authorities. This amendment raises concerns that this authority may be exploited by government agencies, opening the door to the manipulation of endowment properties.

The impact of the law on the Muslim community

The new law is seen as an attempt by the government to control endowments and reduce their role in serving the Muslim community. These amendments threaten Muslims with losing their endowed properties and exposing future generations to great losses. The government’s disregard for consulting Islamic authorities when developing these amendments reflects a deliberate disregard for the Muslim community and its rights to manage its endowments.

Reactions from the Muslim Community

The proposed bill has sparked a wave of objections among Muslims and Islamic organizations. The All India Muslim Consultation Board considered the proposed amendments to be inconsistent with the secular principles of India and an insult to the sentiments of Muslims. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board also rejected the amendments, stressing that it would not tolerate any change that would threaten the rights of the Waqf Board.

In this context, Muslim leaders pointed out that the government is seeking to strip the Waqf Board of its independence and interfere in its affairs, which reflects an unhealthy intention towards Muslims. They also expressed their concern that the amendments will facilitate the seizure of Waqf properties by the government or other parties, which is a clear infringement on the rights of Muslims.

Islamic movements to confront the amendments

In response to these amendments, Muslim community leaders and leaders called on the government to withdraw the bill and hold extensive consultations with religious leaders and Islamic institutions. They also called on political parties and all citizens to stand together to protect the rights of Muslims and prevent the passage of these amendments.

In a press statement, Dr. Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas, spokesperson of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, expressed his concern over the Waqf Amendment Act 2013, and confirmed that the Indian government intends to introduce about 40 amendments to the law with the aim of changing the nature of Waqf properties, making them easier to seize. He also explained that the government may present this bill in Parliament next week.

Ilyas pointed out that this amendment contradicts the protection of Waqf properties under the Indian Constitution and the Shariat Application Act 1937, and considered these properties as gifts from Muslims for religious and charitable purposes and not the property of the government. He continued that the government has not provided any benefit to Muslims, but has deprived them of their rights by canceling the grants of Maulana Azad minorities.

Sheikh Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, Chairman of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, also criticized the new law, pointing out that if the principle of “Waqf by use” is not recognized, all Waqfs will be in danger. He cited examples from various religious places, and explained that the new law places a large number of non-Muslim members in Waqf boards and gives the governor complete power.

Sheikh Arshad Madani, President of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, stated that the government was deliberately taking anti-Muslim decisions and was trying to spread hatred between Hindus and Muslims for electoral purposes. He stressed that religious rights guaranteed by the Constitution should not be taken away and that the proposed amendments were against the principles of the Constitution.

He added that Waqf properties belong to God Almighty and should remain under the supervision of the Waqf Board while maintaining the representation of Muslim scholars. He called on the government to withdraw the amendments and hold detailed consultations with the stakeholders. He also called on all citizens and political parties to stand together against these amendments to protect religious rights and freedoms.

Sheikh Mahmood Asad Madani expressed his concern that the proposed amendments allow the government authorities to interfere unnecessarily in the affairs of Waqfs, which threatens the original status of Waqfs and is considered abolishment of the Waqf Board.