Can the Waqf Bill be another turning point in Indian history, just as the Shah Bano episode proved to be in the 1980s? Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of Shah Bano, which mandated that she be granted maintenance by her husband in accordance with the civil law of the country, many Muslims viewed the judgment as an intrusion into their religious and personal affairs. The decision sparked widespread anger within the community, leading to large-scale protests on the streets.
Veteran journalist Neerja Chowdhury, in her book How Prime Ministers Decide, writes: “Muslims protested on the streets in their lakhs, holding demonstrations in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Patna, Kanpur, Hyderabad and other cities. This also exerted its own pressure on the AIMPLB [All India Muslim Personal Law Board].” She further writes: “These protests in 1985 were the first real signs of large-scale assertiveness by Muslims after independence. There had been demonstrations by the community earlier, of course… But there had never been anything to compare with the outrage that erupted after the judgment.”
The Rajiv Gandhi Years
India, at the time, was a different country. Muslim leaders employed hyperbole and delivered provocative speeches that unsettled the Congress leadership of the era. Rajiv Gandhi, serving as prime minister with an unprecedented mandate, was advised to course-correct to avoid losing Muslim support. Consequently, the Congress made a decision that altered the course of history. The Rajiv government introduced a bill in Parliament, which, given the party’s historic mandate, was easily passed to restore the earlier position regarding Islamic law.
The Rajiv Gandhi government’s decision in the Shah Bano case altered the course of history and gave the RSS a long-awaited opportunity.
However, this move created another issue. At the time, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was relatively weak, but the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), through the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), was working to make the Ram Mandir a significant issue. The Shah Bano case gave the RSS a long-awaited opportunity, presenting a compelling argument for their campaign against what they perceived as appeasement politics. As a result, the Ram Mandir campaign began gaining traction. In this context, Rajiv’s cousin and influential leader, Arun Nehru, advised him to placate Hindus to avoid losing their support. Chowdhury writes: “If Rajiv persisted in placating the Muslim community, Nehru warned, it could cost him his ‘support base among Hindus’ which ‘was becoming shaky’.”
Nehru’s Three Suggestions
“If you want to return to power, you will need to do three things: build a temple in Ayodhya, enact the Uniform Civil Code, and abrogate Article 370”: This was Nehru’s advice to Rajiv Gandhi, as mentioned in Chowdhury’s book. Ultimately, Gandhi succumbed to the pressure, and on February 1, 1986, the locks of the Ram Mandir were opened. The book also suggests that then-RSS leader Bhaurao Devras had given Gandhi a similar advice. Chowdhury writes: “‘Ram Janmabhoomi ka tala kholo‘, Bhaurao had sent Rajiv word, ‘Hinduon ke neta Bano‘ (open the locks and become a leader of Hindus).”
Gandhi should have refrained from both actions – from interfering with the Supreme Court verdict on Shah Bano, as well as from allowing the temple locks to be opened. He should have let history take its own course. In the 1989 Lok Sabha election, the Congress lost power and VP Singh became the Prime Minister, with Arun Nehru part of his cabinet. Since then, the Congress has never secured a majority in the lower house of Parliament. These events played a significant role in paving the way for the rise of the BJP. Of course, this does not imply that history will necessarily follow the same trajectory again.
Parallels Today
While recounting the Shah Bano case, it is important to recognise the significance of the moment. History has its own way of unfolding. Two distinct parallels can be drawn from the Shah Bano episode: first, as was the case then, Muslims today feel that the state is interfering in their religious and personal matters. Second, just as then, there is visible anger within the community today, evidenced by the public protests against the bill.
Supporters attend the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) protest against the Waqf Bill, in New Delhi in March. (ANI)
In the pre-Ram Mandir-movement era, the Muslim leadership in India was undoubtedly influential, and their voices were heard. They were assertive, and the political system, dominated by the Congress, was receptive to their concerns. However, this did not necessarily translate into better economic conditions for the community. While they had greater political influence, this did not equate to economic empowerment.
Brewing Discontent
Today, their bargaining power has diminished a great deal. The ruling BJP appears indifferent to their concerns, despite rhetoric like ‘Sabka Sath, Sabka Vikas‘ or gestures such as ‘Modi ki Saugat‘ on Eid. The BJP openly engages in Hindutva politics and does not have a Muslim leader in the Lok Sabha. The same holds true in states where the BJP is either in power or opposition. It is ironic that the party that introduced the Waqf bill in Parliament had no Muslim MP to speak on an issue directly affecting the community.
The community has shown remarkable patience so far, with reactions becoming increasingly rare. Silence has been their armour. Apart from the Shaheen Bagh movement, the community has largely refrained from taking to the streets. They have even stopped responding to Asaduddin Owaisi’s aggressive posturing and have distanced themselves from the influence of Muslim clerics. A new urban, literate, middle-class leadership is emerging, prioritising education and self-improvement. There is a growing consensus within the community that this storm, too, shall pass. Until then, they believe it is best to lie low, avoid provocation, steer clear of politics, and focus their energies on economic advancement.
However, now, the Waqf Bill episode threatens to disrupt this fragile understanding. If that were to happen, it could have far-reaching consequences.
(The author is co-founder of SatyaHindi and author of ‘Reclaiming Bharat’ and ‘Hindu Rashtra’)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
