NEW DELHI: The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has vehemently condemned the Indian Parliament’s recent passage of a Bill that makes disrespect toward the national song, Vande Mataram, a punishable offense. In a press release dated 31 July, the AIMPLB characterized the legislation as an infringement on religious and constitutional freedoms, urging the government not to enforce patriotic sentiments through legal means.
The Board asserted that this law contradicts the fundamental constitutional values of secularism and democracy in India, representing a significant threat to the religious liberties of citizens. They emphasized that compelling participation in a song or slogan infused with religious significance undermines the essential rights enshrined in the Constitution.
Objection to Legal Coercion
Dr SQR Ilyas, the spokesperson for the AIMPLB, stated that mandating Vande Mataram across all communities conflicts with both constitutional tenets and Islamic beliefs. He remarked, “Any attempt to make Vande Mataram compulsory for all sections and religious communities through legal coercion is not only objectionable but also contrary to the fundamental principles of the Constitution.”
The AIMPLB pointed out that during the constitution’s drafting, the Constituent Assembly only adopted the initial two stanzas of Vande Mataram at the national level, deeming the religious implications of the remaining stanzas incompatible with India’s secular identity.
Citing Constitutional Rights
Dr Ilyas further contended that specific extracts from the song liken the motherland to a goddess, which contradicts the Islamic principle of Tawheed, or the oneness of God. He emphasized, “Therefore, compelling a Muslim to participate in a song, slogan or practice carrying a religious meaning contrary to his or her faith is wholly unacceptable.”
The AIMPLB highlighted Articles 25 and 19 of the Constitution, which safeguard freedom of religion and expression, asserting that individuals have the right to abstain from participating in actions that conflict with their consciences. “These constitutional safeguards clearly imply that no citizen can be compelled to adopt or participate in any song, slogan, ideology or symbol against his or her religious beliefs and conscience,” the statement stressed.
The Board referred to the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, which upheld the principle that individuals cannot be punished for not participating in acts contrary to their religious beliefs. The Court noted that freedom of expression includes the right to remain silent, and that respectful non-participation is not to be construed as disrespect.
Distinction Between Patriotism and Worship
The AIMPLB also sought to differentiate between patriotic sentiment and religious devotion, asserting that affection for one’s nation should not be conflated with acts of worship. They stated, “Love for the motherland and worship of the motherland are two entirely different concepts. Muslims deeply love their country and consider love for the homeland part of their civic and moral responsibility, but they cannot regard the country as a deity or goddess.”
The Board insisted that patriotism should be measured by one’s commitment to the Constitution and the rights of the people rather than by the utterance of specific slogans or songs. They further called upon the government to focus on pressing issues such as unemployment, inflation, poverty, education, healthcare, economic disparity, and social injustice instead of advancing what they termed sensitive and divisive legislation.
In conclusion, the AIMPLB stated that distracting public attention from critical issues by stoking emotional and religious controversies undermines both the national interest and democratic principles. They reiterated that India’s unity can only be preserved through the protection of constitutional supremacy, religious freedoms, and equal rights for all citizens.
