Jamaat Leadership Raises Serious Concerns Over Demolition of Mosques, SIR Irregularities and Suppression of Dissent
New Delhi: Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH) has urged the government to adopt dialogue instead of confrontation on public issues, raising serious concerns over the repeated targeting of places of worship, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and restrictions on peaceful democratic protests.
JIH Vice President, Prof. Salim Engineer, expressed concern over the manner in which the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls is being carried out, saying, “The reported removal of around 13 crore names, including those of millions of genuine voters, had caused widespread concern. The electoral roll is the foundation of representative democracy and large-scale revisions demand exceptional transparency, care and accessible mechanisms for correction. Questions surrounding electoral decisions, the independence and constitutional functioning of the Election Commission of India, and the judiciary’s approach to matters affecting the right to vote have further weakened public confidence. Declining trust in democratic institutions could create wider concerns for law and order as well as the stability of the country. Jamaat-e-Islami Hind calls upon the Chief Election Commissioner to accept moral responsibility for the serious concerns surrounding the electoral roll process and voluntarily step down if the Commission is unable to command public confidence. The SIR process must be stopped, eligible voters affected by the revision be identified, and their names restored. An independent investigation should be conducted into irregularities, with accountability wherever wrongdoing is proved. Reforms must be initiated in the composition and appointment process of the Election Commission to ensure neutrality and impartiality, with meaningful participation of the government, opposition and judiciary.”
Prof. Salim Engineer also raised the issue of increasing use of administrative procedures and police restrictions to discourage peaceful democratic protests. Referring to recent protests, including those called by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board and the Monitoring Committee of Indian Muslims, as well as the 2 October public protest against SIR and the Chief Election Commissioner, he said, “Denial of permission and detention of peaceful protesters raised serious questions about the space available for democratic expression. He said that peaceful protest is a legitimate democratic channel for citizens to question government decisions and institutional actions. We urge the government and police authorities to make prior permission unnecessary for peaceful public expression, with prior intimation and reasonable arrangements for public safety ordinarily being sufficient. We call for an end to unnecessary detention and unjustified FIRs, independent investigation of allegations of police mistreatment, and accountability for officials found responsible. The government must choose dialogue over confrontation, engage directly with citizens and organisations, and address genuine grievances through democratic engagement and institutional dialogue.”
JIH Vice President Malik Moatasim Khan, voiced concern over the repeated targeting of mosques, churches and other places of worship, said, “These demolitions were creating widespread resentment, anxiety and frustration among religious minorities. Places of worship carry deep religious and emotional significance, and any action against them requires fairness, sensitivity and strict adherence to law. The selective application of law against religious places of Muslims and Christians has damaged the credibility of the administration. Recurring controversies around religious places are creating social tension and diverting public attention from pressing economic and social concerns. If such targeting continues, protests could spread and develop into a larger people’s movement. We call upon the authorities to immediately stop the abuse of laws in matters involving places of worship and ensure that the claims and concerns of all sides are carefully examined before any action is taken. Disputes should, as far as possible, be resolved through regularisation, legal settlement or other lawful mechanisms, avoiding demolition. Where demolition is genuinely unavoidable under a final judicial or lawful determination, the process should remain under judicial supervision. We also call for an impartial investigation, monitored by the Supreme Court, into past demolitions where questions of legality have been raised, and appropriate steps for restoration wherever unlawful demolitions are established.”
