Police stand outide a mosque in Prayagraj in Uttar Pradesh, after the passage of Waqf (Amendment) Bill in Parliament. PTI Photo
The positive side is the return of parliamentary culture the way it should be — a fierce issue-based debate in the two Houses, followed by a decisive 'division'
It is not surprising that both Houses of Parliament discussed and passed the Waqf Amendment Bill without addressing any of the key objections of either representatives of the Muslim community, or Opposition parties.
From the legislation’s introduction in August last year, it was evident that the Bharatiya Janata Party’s primary intention was to send a larger political message to its core Hindu majoritarian electoral constituency – that autonomy and self-control of Muslims on a cash-rich sector has been successfully curtailed by this government.
Reform, not primary objective
Reform, or putting an end to what were believed to be malpractices, or misuse of powers insofar as Waqf properties were concerned – even by sections within the community, was never the primary objective.
The government’s alacrity, with which it agreed to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee, was against the grain of the National Democratic Alliance government’s conduct or Parliamentary behaviour.
Because of the clear majority that the BJP secured in the Lok Sabha polls in 2014 and 2019, its High Command no longer felt the need to refer most Bills to parliamentary committees. Consultations with allies were also negligible.
BJP was uncertain
The decision last August to immediately constitute a JPC to deliberate on the legislation reflected the BJP’s uncertainty after failing to secure a parliamentary majority in last year’s parliamentary polls.
In contrast, ruling party members in the JPC and government initially redacted dissenting notes of Opposition members while tabling the report during the first half of the Budget Session.
Although these were later tabled in the two Houses following an agitated opposition blocking proceedings, this act in the first place, underscored that the BJP had won over two numerically significant allies – the Janata Dal (U) and the Telugu Desam Party.
Even the functioning of the JPC was questionable and at times the Chairman followed the pattern set by the two presiding officers of Parliament – often rendering the proceedings into shambolic and grossly undemocratic spectacles.
Also Read: 'Religious, social and political blow': What Urdu media says about Waqf Bill
In fact, proceedings in the two Houses on the Waqf issue were demonstrative of these two parties compromising on ‘instinctive’ politics of their leaders – Nitish Kumar and N Chandrababu Naidu – of paying heed to minority concerns.
Four parties' role proved crucial
Along with the Biju Janata Dal and YSR Congress Party, which did not issue a party whip in Rajya Sabha to vote against the Amendment Bill, these two NDA allies, will be seen by the people opposing the legislation as being ‘responsible’ for its passage.
Importantly, the two NDA allies have a combined strength of 28 seats in Lok Sabha and if these many votes were cast against the Bill, only the Speaker’s ‘casting vote’ would have secured passage for the legislation in the House.
Likewise, if the two allies and the leadership of BJD and YSR Congress had issued whips for their Rajya Sabha members to vote against the Bill, it would have been defeated and a humbling moment for the BJP.
Undeniably, the four parties played a part in enabling passage of yet another anti-minority legislation in Parliament and it is likely that their loyal voters from the community may penalize the parties for this.
Litmus test for Nitish in polls
The first test of whether this happens or not, will be discernible during Assembly elections in Bihar later this year, where the JD(U) and Kumar personally, still retain a small measure of their support among Muslims. The party has already suffered a jolt with a series of resignations soon after the Billl was taken up.
Also Read: UP has most Waqf properties in India; graveyards, mosques take most space
The newly enacted legislation already faces challenges from two quarters. The Congress party has already announced its intention to challenge the law in the Supreme Court, with its MP Mohammed Jawed knocking on the apex court's doors.
AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi has also moved the Court challenging the constitutionality of the Amendment on the grounds that it takes way protection accorded to waqfs under Article 26 of the Constitution while retaining such constitutional shield for religious and charitable endowments of other religions.
Protests in multiple cities
Interesting, there were protests in several important cities, for instance, Ahmedabad, Kolkata, Delhi and Chennai. It is early to assess whether these voices against the government’s step are momentary or will be sustained. But, it cannot be ignored that the agitation against the Citizenship Amendment Act in 2019 had started in Delhi and gradually spread across India and would have assumed ominous proportions for the BJP if Covid-19 had not brought the world to a grinding halt.
It also has to be recalled that the police force in Delhi played a questionable role, alongside several important members of the BJP, in the communal riots that were triggered in the city and used to selectively penalize members of the minority community and civil society activists.
Some positives too
Despite the passage of the Waqf Amendment Bill, the positive side is the return of parliamentary culture the way it should be — a fierce issue-based debate in the two Houses, followed by a decisive 'division' at the end of the debate.
The most heartening feature of the debate and subsequent voting was that the Houses were wholly divided between the ‘AYES’ and the ‘NOS’; there were no abstentions. Ambivalence of the past, when anti-BJP parties were diffident of taking a clear stance against Hindutva politics, was cast aside. Fears of ‘losing’ the support of Hindus and being cast as ‘pro-minority’ were ignored.
INDIA Bloc resurgence?
Moreover, all Opposition parties appear to have stood together against the Bill, which is aimed at playing to the majoritarian gallery. It is early to assess whether this specific agreement on one issue is going to lead to the revival of the INDIA bloc in letter and spirit.
But, it cannot be ignored that Parliament has functioned as it should despite the partisan stance of the presiding officers of Lok Sabha as well as Rajya Sabha. Quite clearly, the functioning of key institutions can be subverted occasionally and on issues, but it is difficult for even the most undemocratic regimes to completely hollow them out.
Extremely tricky issue
It has to be borne in mind that the Waqf issue is extremely complicated and the BJP has harnessed this by selectively highlighting deficiencies of the system.
Importantly, there are numerous groups within the Muslims, and they are backed by a large section of non-Muslims who have long called for changes; debates during the UPA era when the regime of that time tried to bring these amendments are illuminating.
Also Read: Parliament's nod to Waqf Bill 'watershed moment': PM Modi
Unambiguously, the message that has resounded with Opposition parties and the people, Muslims and non-Muslims, is that the ruling party’s process on the Waqf issue was malevolent in approach and politically motivated.
It is, however, too early to fathom if the majoritarian sentiment, which has greater patronage in today’s India, will get further bolstered and a significant section of people will conclude that the government must be ‘backed’ for yet another ‘success’ in reining in the minorities.
Diversionary tactics
Many would argue that the haste, with which the Waqf Amendment Bill was passed, was evidence of the BJP’s decision to distract public opinion from more pressingly issues.
That Indian Parliament was debating till early hours of the morning on two successive days amid United States President, Donald Trump’s delusional announcement on tariffs, is proof of the government misplaced priorities.
The new tariff regime will likely trigger a yet unforeseeable economic crisis for India. But the government found a divisive issue to circumvent this matter and the session of Parliament has concluded without its members and the people at large learning about the government’s assessment and its likely steps in response to Trump’s announcement.
(The Federal seeks to present views and opinions from all sides of the spectrum. The information, ideas or opinions in the articles are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Federal.)
