 |
|
The 1981 Act that granted Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) its minority status was a pivotal moment in the institution's history. This legislation, passed by the Indira Gandhi-led Congress government, reversed a 1967 Supreme Court ruling that had stripped AMU of its minority status. The debate surrounding the AMU (Amendment) Bill was heated, with strong opinions expressed on both sides of the issue.
On one side, the CPI(M) vehemently opposed the amendment, fearing it would compromise the university's secular character. Somnath Chatterjee, a prominent CPI(M) MP, voiced concerns that granting minority status would lead to sectarian control and undermine the institution's democratic principles. Chatterjee argued that while AMU should promote Muslim culture and education, it must maintain its essential secular character to uphold its true tradition and facilitate the genuine advancement of Muslims.
Those who supported the amendment, like the Janata Party's Ram Jethmalani and Subramanian Swamy, viewed the legislation as a necessary step to ensure the educational advancement of Muslims. Jethmalani, despite supporting the principle of minority status, criticized the Bill for not explicitly stating that AMU was established 'by Muslims for Muslims.' He also expressed reservations about the Bill's lack of concrete guidelines regarding the Centre's power to maintain employment and teaching standards within the university.
Arif Mohammad Khan, a Congress leader at the time, argued in favor of the Bill, praising the Hindu majority's 'largeheartedness' in supporting the initiative. Subramanian Swamy, while acknowledging the importance of recognizing AMU as an institution established by Muslims, warned of potential 'Marxist' control over the university. He believed that the Bill's structural changes could potentially weaken the influence of certain families who, he argued, had exerted a dominant influence on the institution.
The debate highlights the complex and often conflicting perspectives on the role of minority institutions in a secular society. The CPI(M)'s concerns about the potential for sectarianism and the erosion of secular values were balanced by the proponents' arguments regarding the importance of preserving the historical and cultural significance of AMU as an institution established by Muslims. This debate serves as a reminder of the ongoing dialogue around identity, education, and the delicate balance between fostering inclusion and safeguarding secular principles in a diverse nation.
Source: When Parliament debated the 1981 Act to which AMU minority status can be traced