img

The Waqf Amendment Bill is directly an issue related to Waqf property, but political parties are also keeping a close eye on how much it can affect the vote share. The BJP, which is standing unabashedly by taking sides, has a logical argument that it wants the welfare of poor and backward Muslims by removing the anomalies in the Waqf Act.

 

Agreeing with this logic, the main allies of the NDA government, Janata Dal United (JDU) and Telugu Desam Party (TDP) are supporting the government, but in measured words, the concern of the parties to preserve their old "secular image" is reflected.

 

What message does the opposition want to give to the Muslim community?

On the other hand, the opposition camp is sharing its voice against the bill. Undoubtedly, their strength cannot become a hindrance in the way of the bill being passed by majority, but it is possible that it is an attempt to send a message to the Muslim community that who fought how much, because the hope lies in the weight of attitude in the scale of votes.

 

Every party has its eyes on the Muslim vote bank

The arithmetic of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha is clear that the path of Wakf Amendment Bill is smooth in both the houses. Now all eyes are on the stand of political parties, because Muslim vote bank is a big support for most of the parties in the country. The central government or rather BJP wants that there should be maximum discussion on this bill. Minority Affairs and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju has clearly said that the country wants to know what is the stand of which party on the Wakf Amendment Bill. This will also remain on record for thousands of years.

 

Opposition wanted to put pressure on Nitish-Naidu

 The intention of the BJP behind this seems to be to accuse the opposition parties of Muslim appeasement. But the bill is being brought by the NDA government, whose major constituents are also JDU and TDP. Among them, whether it is Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar or Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu, both have the image of secular leaders. The opposition wanted to put pressure on both of them.

 

 Since the coalition dharma has to be fulfilled, both the parties made it clear that they are completely with the government and will support the bill, but they also tried to send a message to the Muslim community through their words. For example, JDU parliamentary party leader in Lok Sabha, Lallan Singh said that JDU or Nitish do not need a certificate from the Congress. No one has done as much work for Muslims as the Nitish government has done, while for the opposition, secularism is just a slogan.

 

Similarly, TDP's national spokesperson Prem Kumar Jain issued a statement that TDP will support the bill. He also added that CM Naidu always says that he will protect the interests of Muslims. Hindus and Muslims are his two eyes. It is hoped that the government will include his party's suggestions in the bill. Now the remaining opposition camp is competing to see who can stand more strongly in favor of Muslims.

 

Gaurav Gogoi boycotted the Business Advisory Committee

 Congress has already declared open opposition. MP Gaurav Gogoi has indicated this by boycotting the Business Advisory Committee. Be it SP chief Akhilesh Yadav or prominent national general secretary Prof. Ramgopal Yadav, they have already said that they will oppose the bill because BJP wants to spoil communal harmony.

 

AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, a prominent face of Muslim politics, has said that whether it is Nitish, Naidu, Chirag Paswan or Jayant Chaudhary, whoever supports the bill will have to suffer the consequences. DMK MP Kanimozhi has said that she will strongly oppose the bill in Parliament.

 

At the same time, Bhim Army chief MP Chandrashekhar, who wants to make Dalit-Muslim alliance the basis of his politics in Uttar Pradesh, has announced a struggle from Parliament to the streets. In such a situation, it is certain that this moment in the Lok Sabha will be tumultuous, but it remains to be seen how aggressive whose attitude will be.


Read More: 71 out of 87 witnesses turned hostile, even the deceased's son did not identify the murderers, Supreme Court was forced to acquit the accused

--Advertisement--