The protest on Monday, organized by the All India Muslim Law Board (AIMLB) in the national capital, was exposed embarrassingly when Republic TV reporters questioned participants about their cause. Many stood silent, unable to explain why they were there. Some clutched placards with slogans they didn’t understand, while others murmured vague references to ‘sampathi’ (property). This lack of awareness underscored the protest’s hollowness, suggesting it was driven more by political maneuvering than genuine concern.
Leading the protest was Hyderabad MP and All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi, a politician known for his vocal criticism of Waqf Board management. Ironically, Owaisi has previously lambasted Waqf Board trustees for misusing funds and treating these institutions as personal fiefdoms. Yet, in a bid to cement his position as the sole voice of Muslims in India, he opposed any government action aimed at reforming these very institutions.
Owaisi’s stance against the Modi government appears less about genuine grievances and more about political posturing. Whether his opposition to the BJP is rooted in ideological differences or a calculated effort to consolidate his leadership among Muslims remains a subject of debate. Unlike his father, Sultan Salahuddin Owaisi, who was a seasoned politician with a more measured approach, the younger Owaisi seems determined to dominate the national stage by portraying himself as the community’s only savior.
Despite his contradictions, Owaisi has managed to position himself as a defender of Muslims, often attacking even religious leaders such as those associated with Jama Masjid. Unfortunately, a section of the media has contributed to this myth, amplifying his rhetoric and allowing him a platform that prioritizes his personal brand over the broader concerns of the Muslim community. Even channels like Republic TV, despite exposing this protest, ultimately benefit from the theatrics that such figures provide in their quest for higher viewership.
The controversy stems from the Waqf Board Amendment Bill, a reform measure designed to curb the mismanagement of Waqf properties, which rank as the third-largest landholding entity in India after the Indian Railways and the Army. Despite controlling vast resources, the Waqf Boards have done little to uplift marginalized Muslim groups, particularly Pasmanda Muslims, who face systemic socio-economic challenges similar to Dalits in Hindu society.
Unlike past governments, the Modi administration has not rushed the bill through Parliament. Instead, it referred it to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), which deliberated for six months, examined stakeholder concerns, and proposed over 400 amendments before tabling it in the Lok Sabha. This approach contradicts the frequent opposition claim that the government bulldozes laws without consultation.
Despite this transparent legislative process, the opposition, including the Congress and AIMIM, chose to protest the bill. Even when the government accommodated dissenting opinions in the final draft, these parties took to the streets, misleading the Muslim community into believing that their rights were under threat. The strategy mirrors their previous fear-mongering on issues like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the now-repealed farm laws—legislations that were passed through both Houses of Parliament and received presidential assent, yet were met with disruptive protests.
The same opposition parties that accuse the BJP of undermining constitutional bodies have consistently dismissed democratic processes when it suits their agenda. Their obstructionist stance ignores significant legislative milestones that have benefited the nation, including the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A and the banning of Triple Talaq—reforms that have brought tangible progress.
It is time for nationalist-minded Indian Muslims to recognize this pattern of political exploitation. Their ancestors chose to remain in India post-Partition, pledging allegiance to the Constitution. Yet, politicians like Owaisi manipulate constitutional rhetoric to mislead their community for personal and political gains. The Indian media must also introspect and stop giving disproportionate space to leaders who thrive on divisive narratives rather than genuine representation.
Owaisi’s politics mirror those of dynastic rulers like the Abdullahs and Muftis of Jammu and Kashmir—families that have profited while keeping their communities in poverty and ignorance. If real progress is to be achieved, India’s Muslim community must reject such leadership and engage in constructive dialogue rather than staged protests based on misinformation.
