[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: Lashing out on the opposition for criticising the Waqf (Modification) Invoice, Union minority affairs minister Kiren Rijiju on Thursday stated the Waqf administration was captured by some robust Muslim communities at the price of minor teams like Bohras, Pasmandas, Ahmedias and Aghakhanis, and adjustments to the regulation would offer justice to them in addition to to Muslim girls and youngsters.
The invoice’s introduction in Lok Sabha was met with vociferous criticism from the opposition which termed it an try by BJP to create a polarising difficulty towards Muslims with a watch on the approaching Maharashtra and Haryana elections.
The Mussalman Waqf (Repeal) Invoice, 2024, associated to the Waqf invoice for scrapping of the previous Act, was additionally launched.
Rijiju stated the Waqf (Modification) Invoice didn’t search to intervene within the spiritual affairs of Muslims nor was it anti-Muslim as alleged by the opposition.
He stated it was futuristic in its intent to rid the regulation of archaic provisions and for bringing the ‘statute of limitations’ into power, which might bar any individual from having the ability to lay ancestral declare relationship again 500 years to a property and getting it declared Waqf asset.
Congress’s Ok C Venugopal and Gaurav Gogoi, SP’s Akhilesh Yadav and Mohibullah Nadwi, DMK’s Kanimozhi, RSP’s N Ok Premachandran, AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi, NCP’s Supriya Sule, Trinamool’s Sudip Bandyopadhyay and Kalyan Banerjee and Mian Altaf of NC amongst others stated the invoice violated Articles 25-26 of the Structure and was BJP’s try and intervene within the spiritual affairs of Muslims, apart from being outdoors the legislative competence of the government and Parliament.
In addition they warned that it might not stand up to judicial scrutiny.
Rijiju gave a point-wise rebuttal to their arguments, stating that essential adjustments prompt within the invoice have been as per the options of Sachar Committee that was constituted and accepted by the previous Congress govt.
Venugopal stated the invoice was unconstitutional and shouldn’t be allowed.
Permitting non-Muslims to be members of Waqf Boards was an assault on the Muslim faith and their religion, he stated, including that it was designed protecting in thoughts the forthcoming elections in Maharashtra and Haryana.
“This Home doesn’t have the competence to amend this Act,” Asaduddin Owaisi stated, including that Waqf properties weren’t public properties.
Bandyopadhyay and Kanimozhi, too, referred to as it violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Structure. Whereas Bandyopadhyay reminded the chair that land being a state topic, the invoice was “unconstitutional, divisive and towards federalism”, Kanimozhi stated the invoice was towards Muslims and minorities.
Premachandran stated the Waqf (Modification) Invoice was supposed to disempower Waqf Boards as it might be for the collector or the government to certify whether or not a property was a Waqf property or not. “They’re eradicating Part 104. Then, eradicating Part 40 implies that there isn’t any want for Waqf Boards. Waqf Boards turn out to be completely powerless. It implies that they’re dismantling the system,” the RSP functionary added.
The invoice’s introduction in Lok Sabha was met with vociferous criticism from the opposition which termed it an try by BJP to create a polarising difficulty towards Muslims with a watch on the approaching Maharashtra and Haryana elections.
The Mussalman Waqf (Repeal) Invoice, 2024, associated to the Waqf invoice for scrapping of the previous Act, was additionally launched.
Rijiju stated the Waqf (Modification) Invoice didn’t search to intervene within the spiritual affairs of Muslims nor was it anti-Muslim as alleged by the opposition.
He stated it was futuristic in its intent to rid the regulation of archaic provisions and for bringing the ‘statute of limitations’ into power, which might bar any individual from having the ability to lay ancestral declare relationship again 500 years to a property and getting it declared Waqf asset.
Congress’s Ok C Venugopal and Gaurav Gogoi, SP’s Akhilesh Yadav and Mohibullah Nadwi, DMK’s Kanimozhi, RSP’s N Ok Premachandran, AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi, NCP’s Supriya Sule, Trinamool’s Sudip Bandyopadhyay and Kalyan Banerjee and Mian Altaf of NC amongst others stated the invoice violated Articles 25-26 of the Structure and was BJP’s try and intervene within the spiritual affairs of Muslims, apart from being outdoors the legislative competence of the government and Parliament.
In addition they warned that it might not stand up to judicial scrutiny.
Rijiju gave a point-wise rebuttal to their arguments, stating that essential adjustments prompt within the invoice have been as per the options of Sachar Committee that was constituted and accepted by the previous Congress govt.
Venugopal stated the invoice was unconstitutional and shouldn’t be allowed.
Permitting non-Muslims to be members of Waqf Boards was an assault on the Muslim faith and their religion, he stated, including that it was designed protecting in thoughts the forthcoming elections in Maharashtra and Haryana.
“This Home doesn’t have the competence to amend this Act,” Asaduddin Owaisi stated, including that Waqf properties weren’t public properties.
Bandyopadhyay and Kanimozhi, too, referred to as it violative of Articles 25 and 26 of the Structure. Whereas Bandyopadhyay reminded the chair that land being a state topic, the invoice was “unconstitutional, divisive and towards federalism”, Kanimozhi stated the invoice was towards Muslims and minorities.
Premachandran stated the Waqf (Modification) Invoice was supposed to disempower Waqf Boards as it might be for the collector or the government to certify whether or not a property was a Waqf property or not. “They’re eradicating Part 104. Then, eradicating Part 40 implies that there isn’t any want for Waqf Boards. Waqf Boards turn out to be completely powerless. It implies that they’re dismantling the system,” the RSP functionary added.
[ad_2]
This Publish could include copywrite
