BJP’s CR Kesavan criticises INDI bloc for opposing “historic” Waqf (Amendment) Bill

Chennai (Tamil Nadu) [India], August 9 (ANI): BJP national spokesperson CR Kesavan criticised the Congress party and INDI bloc for opposing the Waqf (Amendment) Bill as he dubbed it as “historic”.

Kesavan said that this will empower those belonging to the Muslim community.

“Why has the landmark legislation with such positive provisions made the Congress and INDI alliance so nervous and rattled? Why is the Congress and INDI alliance against rendering justice to our Muslim brothers and sisters whose voices have been crushed? Why are they trying to mislead the Muslim community? Why is the INDI Alliance trying to play the politics of political appeasement?” Kesavan asked.

“This a historic bill and people from all sections have welcomed it. This will empower our brothers and sisters of the Muslim community,” he said while speaking to ANI on Friday.

Congress MP K Suresh alleged that the amendments to the Waqf Act were brought because the government wanted to take over the Waqf properties and called it “anti-constitutional.”

“The properties of the Waqf Board are their properties. The government wants to take over the Waqf properties. That is why the Government of India is bringing this bill. Its purpose is to attack minorities, especially Muslim minorities. It’s an anti-constitutional Bill,” K Suresh told ANI.

“The entire opposition strongly protested. Even the supporting parties of the NDA- LJP and TDP are not happy with this Bill,” he added.

Union Minister for Minority Affairs Kiren Rijiju moved the bill in Lok Sabha on Thursday. The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which seeks to “effectively address” issues related to the powers of the State Waqf Boards, registration and survey of waqf properties and removal of encroachments, was introduced in Lok Sabha.

Opposition parties including the Congress, DMK, NCP, Trinamool Congress and AIMIM strongly opposed the introduction of the bill, saying its provisions were against federalism and the constitutional provisions. While some members demanded the withdrawal of the bill, many suggested that should be sent to a standing committee.