dailyO
Politics

The BJP doesn't mind khap panchayats, but is politicising Hamid Ansari's Sharia court remarks

Advertisement
Saif Ullah Khan
Saif Ullah KhanJul 14, 2018 | 12:13

The BJP doesn't mind khap panchayats, but is politicising Hamid Ansari's Sharia court remarks

Ansari was legally right in his views on Sharia courts.

Former Vice-President Hamid Ansari on July 12 triggered a row by backing the proposal of opening Sharia courts in the country, saying that each community has the right to practise its own personal law.

"People are confusing social practices with legal system. Our law recognises that each community can have its own rules. Personal law in India covers marriage, divorce, adoption and inheritance. Each community has a right to practise its own personal law," he told news agency ANI.

Advertisement

Ansari was legally right in his views on Sharia courts.
Unnecessary row:  Ansari was legally right in his views on Sharia courts.

Last week, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) announced its plan to set up Sharia courts across the country to resolves issues as per Islamic laws. The matter will be discussed on July 15 at a meeting in the national capital.

"At present, there are 40 such courts in Uttar Pradesh. We plan to open one such court in all districts of the country. The objective of Darul-Qaza is to resolve matters in light of Shariat laws instead of going to other courts," AIMPLB senior member Zafaryab Zilani had said.

Not one to be left behind, Uttar Pradesh Shia Central Waqf Board chief Waseem Rizvi, who had previously written a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi urging him to shut down madrasas as "religious education institutions bred terrorists", slammed the proposal. Rizvi questioned the AIMPLB's authority to set up such courts, saying there was no place for such legal recourse in the country.

"There is a Constitution in India; judges are appointed on the basis of that. There is no place for Shariat courts in India. Who is Muslim Personal Law Board to set up parallel courts? This is sedition," Rizvi had said.

Advertisement

Another, more significant body to take offence to Ansari's remarks was the ruling BJP.

While the AIMPLB did clarify that the courts would merely interpret sharia, or the Islamic law, for Muslims who approach them for arbitration, the BJP was not satisfied.

Ansari was merely voicing his opinion, but the reaction of the BJP — whose Haryana CM Manohar Lal Khattar had earlier dismissed calls for banning Khap Panchayats in his state, calling them "useful instruments" of society that carry out social reforms — was nothing but political.

The BJP attacked the former VP, with party MP and spokesperson Meenakshi Lekhi saying there was "no place for a Shariat court, be it (in a) district or village or city". She added that this was not the "Islamic Republic of India". Lekhi, a senior lawyer, chose to gloss over the fact that the top court itself had earlier rejected the plea for a ban on Sharia courts.

AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi, himself a member of the personal law board, was quick to ask the BJP leaders to read the Supreme Court's judgement on Sharia courts before commenting. "These are Darul Qaza and they resolve disputes speedily at very little expense," the Hyderabad MP said.

Advertisement

The former VP has been in the crosshairs of the Modi government ever since he said that Muslims felt insecure in India, in reply to a question by Karan Thapar on Rajya Sabha TV.

Stung by the remarks, the PM himself had led the charge against Ansari.

Speaking during Ansari's farewell, Modi recalled his diplomatic career, during which he spent many years in West Asia, and his role, after retirement, as the vice-chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University and as the chairman of the Minorities Commission.

In his farewell speech for Ansari, Modi had said the outgoing VP was now 'free to follow his core belief'.
Not a laughing matter: In his farewell speech for Ansari, Modi had said the outgoing VP was now 'free to follow his core belief'.

But by apparently reducing the former VP to just his Muslim identity, the PM glossed over his illustrious career and tried his best to dismiss Ansari's remarks over the insecurity among minorities as coming from a person selfishly vested only in his own community.

Where the law stands

The Supreme Court on July 7, 2014, refused to ban Sharia courts, but said they have no legal sanction and a fatwa or diktat pronounced by them is not binding on anyone. "No religion is allowed to curb anyone's fundamental rights," the SC said to a petition by a Delhi-based advocate, Vishwa Lochan Madan, who challenged parallel religious courts run by institutions like the Darul Qaza and Darul Iftaa.

The court ruled that fatwas — basically, opinions of experts in Muslim personal law — may be issued only if parties approach them for dispute resolution or adjudication, mainly in civil and matrimonial issues. In any event, the fatwa is not binding on anyone, including the person who asked for it, said a bench of Justices Chandramauli K Prasad and P C Ghose.

These courts offer an informal justice delivery system for amicable settlements, the court ruled.

The petitioner had argued that Sharia courts decided on religious and social freedoms of Muslim citizens and restricted their fundamental rights with their fatwas.

The court reserved its verdict in February, saying, "These are political-religious issues. We can't decide them. In this country some people believe Gangajal can cure all ailments. It is a matter of belief."

Muslim community's ruling on Sharia Courts

The community seems divided on the issue of Sharia courts.

Double standards? Haryana CM Khattar had called Khap panchayats useful instruments
Double standards? Haryana CM Khattar had called khap panchayats 'useful instruments of society that carry out social reforms'.

Several Muslim scholars have held that the SC's 2014 ruling does not contradict Islamic principles. They opine that the Shariat pertains to social laws that are subject to conditions in society — Muslims can follow the Shariat as much as is possible in their society.

According to a report in The Hindustan Times, several experts said that Muslims in India anyway subject themselves to the country's secular criminal laws — only private family matters may be settled through fatwas or Islamic edicts, "when both sides have agreed" to abide by such diktats.

Others are skeptical and believe opening such courts will only draw negative attention towards the community, especially in today's communally charged atmosphere.Some Muslim women have also long protested the Sharia Courts, saying that being male-dominated, their decisions are lopsided. They say since the rulings cannot be enforced, the men refuse to abide by them if the decisions don't go in their favour.

While it's true that the rule of law is supreme in any society, the presence of Sharia Courts do serve a useful purpose in resolving trivial disputes. Most complainants who approach these courts don't have the resources to approach a regular court. Unlike the formal legal system, these processes are speedy and inexpensive. Once the ruling is delivered, it is up to the complainants to abide with it or not. Since the Qazi has no power to enforce the verdict, it cannot be termed as either in conflict with, or parallel to the Indian judicial system.

While Ansari may have been legally right in his views on Sharia courts, the ruling BJP, bestowed with the responsibility of enforcing the law, both in letter and spirit, chose to willfully politicise the issue by making it 'us versus them'.

Instead of allaying fears and dispelling rumours, the party chose to use it as yet another ploy to rally its right-wing support base.

By calling it a step towards a supposed "Islamic Republic of India', the ruling BJP is trying to feed into the narrative that Muslims are still not an integral part of this country and their loyalties apparently lie across the border.

While this may play well with the ruling party vote bank, it will further deepen communal fault lines.

With the minority community already reeling under the recent spate of lynchings, with everything from their food choices to their attire coming under attack, the BJP's reaction to the former VP's comments is yet another reminder of the extent to which our political parties will go to please their vote bank .

Last updated: July 15, 2018 | 22:47
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy