Muslim University is not a Muslim institution says Indian Court By M Ghazali Khan
http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/paper/index.php?article="95 Invoking the absurd logic of one of the most bizarre and politically motivated judgements in Indian legal history, given by the Indian Supreme Court in 1965, Allahabad High Court ruled on January 5, that that Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) is not a Muslim institution and therefore can not be run and managed by them. This historic institution was established by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan in 1877 in the northern Indian city of Aligarh, 80 miles southeast of Delhi, as Muhammadan Anglo Oriental College (MAO College) for the educational advancement of Indian Muslims. Inspired by the elevation of the Hindu college of Varanasi in 1915, to the status of Banaras Hindu University, Muslims also made a representation to the then British Government of India to have the MAO College elevated to a university. After an initial reluctance the Government agreed to grant MAO College, University status. For this, Muslims were required to raise two million rupees. Despite being a huge amount at that time, Muslims fulfilled the condition and the assets of the MAO College were also transferred to the University Foundation Committee. With all the requirements fulfilled by the Muslim community, in 1920 the British Government passed the Aligarh Muslim University Act transforming the existing MAO College into a university. In 1947, India became independent from British rule and barely four years later, in 1951, Indian Parliament, aiming at destroying the minority (Muslim) character of AMU, amended AMU Act 1920. Thus: 1) The requirement that only a Muslim could be the member of University Court was abolished, 2) Statutory right of the University to always have a Muslim Vice Chancellor was taken away, 3) The President of India was made the Visitor of the University and the Governor of Uttar Pardesh – the state in which the University is located – was appointed as its Chief Rector. Thus the supervisory role was taken away from Muslims and was, indirectly, passed on to the Government. This was the period when in the nerve-wracking aftermath of the partition of the country, even a Muslim as eminent as Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, who, at that time, happened to be the Education Minister, could not dare speak against this Act of Parliament which contravened the Article 30 (1) of the Constitution that reads, “All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.” All this was happening when a secular liberal like Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru was the Prime Minister and Dr Zakir Husain, who later became President of India, was the Vice Chancellor of the AMU. In 1965, the 1920 Act was replaced by another Act. Sadly this time too a Muslim, Muhammad Ali Chagla, was the Minister of Education. This time, however, Muslims challenged in the Supreme Court the validity of 1951 and 1965 Acts. But the Supreme Court judges did not disappoint the political leadership of the country. They ruled that the AMU was established by an Act of Parliament and not by the Muslims. However, since 1947, India has always had an independent judiciary but as far as AMU and Muslim Personal Law are concerned, the judges have never been able to free themselves from biases and prejudices against Muslims. However, Muslims did not lose heart. They decided to take the fight in the legislature. The AMU Action Committee was set up to organise and spearhead the struggle for the restoration of Minority Character. But even peaceful protests and meetings were met with police brutalities; unlawful arrests and the bandits belonging to extremist Hindu organisations, were given free hand in engineering anti-Muslim riots and resorting to murders, looting and destruction. In many cases, local police and Provisional Armed Constabulary actively participated in the riots. (Stories of inhuman and unlawful treatment of those who were at the forefront of the struggle, from 1966 - 1972, should have been recorded but unfortunately most of them have died. Only Hafeezurrehman Nomani, former editor of Nada-e-Millat of Lucknow, who is alive, has recorded in detail in his book, Roodad-e-Qafas, his own and his alleged accomplices’ humiliating treatment by district administration, police and jail authorities during his nine months detention in 1966). Faced with continuous struggle by Muslims, however, in 1972, the Government passed another Act in which an effort was made to mollify them. It gave some internal autonomy to the University but fell short of restoring its Minority character. It was rejected by the AMU Action Committee. This time too a Muslim, Professor Noorul Hasan, was the Education Minister who had been a student and a teacher at the AMU. Despite continuous attacks on their rights (remember idols were placed in the Babri Mosque in 1949 with the connivance of the District Administration), for several years Indian Muslims continued to see Congress Party as their saviour. However, Mrs Indira Gandhi’s humiliating defeat in 1977 elections, in which Muslim vote played a crucial role, made her realise her mistakes and in 1981, AMU Amendment Act was passed restoring, partially though, its Minority Character. Last year, AMU Court reserved 50% seats for Muslims in post graduate medical courses. The decision was challenged by some Hindus in the Allahbad High Court. Bizarrely, the judges ruled that the 1981 AMU Amendment Act was illegal and the 1965 decision of the Supreme Court was right. Hence, it meant that the AMU was not a Muslim institution and therefore could not be managed and run by the Muslims and no preference could be given to them. The present Indian Government is an alliance of left wing parties and the Congress Party, known as UPA (United Progressive Alliance). The Human Resources and Development Minister, Arjun Singh, who belongs to the Congress Party, has promised to restore AMU’s Minority Character through legislation. “The former Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, had examined the issue, and in 1980, Election Manifesto had mentioned that all doubts on this account will be removed after the elections. As Prime Minister, she got the AMU Act amended with near unanimity in Parliament,” he said. Singh emphasised that the “Government is committed to the decision she took.” But with not enough MPs to be able to pass any legislation - that is being opposed by opposition extremist Hindu party, BJP, as well as the major left parties - this may be a golden opportunity for the Congress to tell the Muslims, “We are good guys. We tried our best to make laws in your favour but failed to so because of the Hindu extremists and the communists. So in order to get your constitutional rights make us win in the next elections.” AMU community and Indian Muslims are planning to challenge High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court but Muslims, with past experience, are sceptical, and believe it would be miracle if the Court comes up with a fair judgment. Please sign online petition on AMU at: http://www.petitiononline.com/amu2005/petition.html -- This is ZESTGlobal. Post articles on international affairs to [email protected] If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTGlobal by sending a blank mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/join/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
