Thiruvananthapuram (Kerala): Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan while speaking to the media on December 19 said that he was attacked thrice during the SFI protest against him. He said, “On that day, thrice, I was attacked. Then some people were arrested. What about the first 2 places where they had hit my car, has anybody been arrested? And the third place where they were arrested because I got out of the car. I saw that these people were brought in police jeeps and they were pushed back into police chiefs, and they were much more than 8 persons. Others were allowed to flee only 8 persons were taken into custody… They want me to do something to report this… They are asking for something drastic, which I’m not going to oblige them.”
Tag: Arif Mohammed Khan
-
Since triple talaq law, divorce rate among Muslims down by 96 per cent: Kerala Guv Arif Mohd Khan
By PTI
NEW DELHI: The rate of divorce among Muslims has “come down by 96 per cent” since triple talaq was made a punishable offence under the law in 2019 and this has benefitted women and children, Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan said on Thursday.
Addressing a gathering at a seminar here on Uniform Civil Code (UCC), he also wondered if is it not odd that when one seeks justice, religion has to be stated first.
On the All India Muslim Personal Law Board sending its objections on UCC to the Law Commission, Khan said everyone has a right to express their opinion.
“The Law Commission has sought suggestions. And, I am very hopeful that all suggestions that will come up, will get full attention from the Law Commission and the government,” he told reporters later.
The UCC refers to a common set of laws on marriage, divorce and inheritance that would be applicable to all Indian citizens irrespective of religion, tribe or other local customs.
The Law Commission had on June 14 initiated a fresh consultation process on UCC by seeking views from stakeholders, including public and recognised religious organisations, on the politically sensitive issue.
In his address, Khan also spoke of the Shah Bano case of the 1980s.
READ HERE | ‘UCC necessary to bring fundamental right of equality’: Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan
He praised the enactment of the The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act 2019 which makes the practice of instant divorce through triple talaq among Muslims a punishable offence entailing imprisonment of up to three years, and recalled how it took two years since the Supreme Court’s landmark verdict in 2017.
In its verdict, the apex court by a majority of 3:2 had ruled that the practice of divorce through triple talaq among Muslims is “void”, “illegal” and “unconstitutional”.
The apex court also held that the triple talaq is against the basic tenets of Quran.
“Do you know after the judgement, teen talaq did not stop even a single day,” Khan said, and recounted how he got a call from a person in Bahraich in Uttar Pradesh, who mentioned such a case happening with a woman, even after the verdict.
He then mentioned how it took two years to finally have the practice of instant divorce through triple talaq among Muslims, made a punishable offence.
“Talaq has not been banned, and it can’t be banned, triple talaq has been banned, and the result of making it a punishable offence is that in the Muslim community, the rate of divorce has come down by 96 per cent.
And, not only women benefitted, but children too whose future were ruined due to divorce earlier,” Khan said.
In his address, he also mentioned that the British rulers had decided to implement laws for people pertaining to their respective religions.
“Is it not odd that when one goes to seek justice, then one’s religion has to be stated first, and which community one belongs to. So, is it equality before the law? Is it equal protection of the law? No,” he said.
Two women go to a court, and in a similar case, both get different justice because they belong to different religious backgrounds.
How can you accept in today’s era, Khan asked.
NEW DELHI: The rate of divorce among Muslims has “come down by 96 per cent” since triple talaq was made a punishable offence under the law in 2019 and this has benefitted women and children, Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan said on Thursday.
Addressing a gathering at a seminar here on Uniform Civil Code (UCC), he also wondered if is it not odd that when one seeks justice, religion has to be stated first.
On the All India Muslim Personal Law Board sending its objections on UCC to the Law Commission, Khan said everyone has a right to express their opinion.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
“The Law Commission has sought suggestions. And, I am very hopeful that all suggestions that will come up, will get full attention from the Law Commission and the government,” he told reporters later.
The UCC refers to a common set of laws on marriage, divorce and inheritance that would be applicable to all Indian citizens irrespective of religion, tribe or other local customs.
The Law Commission had on June 14 initiated a fresh consultation process on UCC by seeking views from stakeholders, including public and recognised religious organisations, on the politically sensitive issue.
In his address, Khan also spoke of the Shah Bano case of the 1980s.
READ HERE | ‘UCC necessary to bring fundamental right of equality’: Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan
He praised the enactment of the The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act 2019 which makes the practice of instant divorce through triple talaq among Muslims a punishable offence entailing imprisonment of up to three years, and recalled how it took two years since the Supreme Court’s landmark verdict in 2017.
In its verdict, the apex court by a majority of 3:2 had ruled that the practice of divorce through triple talaq among Muslims is “void”, “illegal” and “unconstitutional”.
The apex court also held that the triple talaq is against the basic tenets of Quran.
“Do you know after the judgement, teen talaq did not stop even a single day,” Khan said, and recounted how he got a call from a person in Bahraich in Uttar Pradesh, who mentioned such a case happening with a woman, even after the verdict.
He then mentioned how it took two years to finally have the practice of instant divorce through triple talaq among Muslims, made a punishable offence.
“Talaq has not been banned, and it can’t be banned, triple talaq has been banned, and the result of making it a punishable offence is that in the Muslim community, the rate of divorce has come down by 96 per cent.
And, not only women benefitted, but children too whose future were ruined due to divorce earlier,” Khan said.
In his address, he also mentioned that the British rulers had decided to implement laws for people pertaining to their respective religions.
“Is it not odd that when one goes to seek justice, then one’s religion has to be stated first, and which community one belongs to. So, is it equality before the law? Is it equal protection of the law? No,” he said.
Two women go to a court, and in a similar case, both get different justice because they belong to different religious backgrounds.
How can you accept in today’s era, Khan asked.
-
INTERVIEW | ‘Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran’: Kerala Governor after attack on Salman Rushdie
Express News Service
Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan on Saturday said the violent attack on Salman Rushdie goes against the teachings of Quran but added “one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema”.
Speaking to this paper, Arif Mohammad Khan said: “Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of the Quran which in more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful.”
“I feel that it is not fair to call these acts as Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labeled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema”.
He said “the problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day.”
Excerpts from the interview.
Three decades after the ban on ‘The Satanic Verses’, when even the Ayatollah who issued the fatwa against Salman Rushdie has died, the rage against free speech continues. How Islamic is it to resort to violence against free speech?
Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of Quran which in more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful. I feel that it is not fair to call these acts as Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema.
Much has been said about Islamist terror, does this attack lend credence to this theory?
The problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day which were considered by pious people like Imam Abu Hanifa as wayward and he preferred to die in jail rather than accept their offer of senior positions to him.
Now these laws provide for coercion and use of force. So as long as these laws are accepted as Muslim Law, it is very difficult to dismiss the criticism.
You had taken a principled stand against pandering to religious fundamentalism. How far has the nation travelled since your resignation from the Rajiv Gandhi ministry?
Exactly as expected. In 1986, the then PM Mr Rajiv Gandhi had announced the decision to overturn the Supreme Court’s Shah Bano judgment and the blowback was so severe that the government had to organize the unlocking of the gate in Ayodhya as a balancing act. The consequences were severe and the people suffered a great deal because the then government chose political expediency over national interests.
What do you think would be the best response by the Muslim community against those giving Fatwas against writers, poets and others exercising free speech?
First, stand up and say boldly that religion is about God-consciousness (Taqwa), it is about promoting moral and ethical behaviour, it is not an instrument to gain political power. Secondly, refuse to accept any law that conflicts with the Quran, notwithstanding the claims made by people for whom religion has become a profession and remember that Islam as a religion does not admit the need of any clergy or middlemen between the Creator and the creation as asserted by Allama Iqbal: Kyon Khaliq o Makhlooq mein Hayal Rahein Parde Peerane Kaleeesa ko Kaleesa se Hatado.
Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan on Saturday said the violent attack on Salman Rushdie goes against the teachings of Quran but added “one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema”.
Speaking to this paper, Arif Mohammad Khan said: “Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of the Quran which in more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful.”
“I feel that it is not fair to call these acts as Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labeled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema”.
He said “the problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day.”
Excerpts from the interview.
Three decades after the ban on ‘The Satanic Verses’, when even the Ayatollah who issued the fatwa against Salman Rushdie has died, the rage against free speech continues. How Islamic is it to resort to violence against free speech?
Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of Quran which in more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful. I feel that it is not fair to call these acts as Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema.
Much has been said about Islamist terror, does this attack lend credence to this theory?
The problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day which were considered by pious people like Imam Abu Hanifa as wayward and he preferred to die in jail rather than accept their offer of senior positions to him.
Now these laws provide for coercion and use of force. So as long as these laws are accepted as Muslim Law, it is very difficult to dismiss the criticism.
You had taken a principled stand against pandering to religious fundamentalism. How far has the nation travelled since your resignation from the Rajiv Gandhi ministry?
Exactly as expected. In 1986, the then PM Mr Rajiv Gandhi had announced the decision to overturn the Supreme Court’s Shah Bano judgment and the blowback was so severe that the government had to organize the unlocking of the gate in Ayodhya as a balancing act. The consequences were severe and the people suffered a great deal because the then government chose political expediency over national interests.
What do you think would be the best response by the Muslim community against those giving Fatwas against writers, poets and others exercising free speech?
First, stand up and say boldly that religion is about God-consciousness (Taqwa), it is about promoting moral and ethical behaviour, it is not an instrument to gain political power. Secondly, refuse to accept any law that conflicts with the Quran, notwithstanding the claims made by people for whom religion has become a profession and remember that Islam as a religion does not admit the need of any clergy or middlemen between the Creator and the creation as asserted by Allama Iqbal: Kyon Khaliq o Makhlooq mein Hayal Rahein Parde Peerane Kaleeesa ko Kaleesa se Hatado.
-
INTERVIEW | ‘Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran’: Kerala Governor after attack on Rushdie
Express News Service
Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan on Saturday said the violent attack on Salman Rushdie goes against the teachings of Quran but added “one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema”.
Speaking to TNIE, Arif Mohammad Khan said: “Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of the Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of the Quran which is more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful.”
“I feel that it is not fair to call these acts Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema.”
He said, “the problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day.”
Excerpts from the interview.
Three decades after the ban on ‘The Satanic Verses’, when even the Ayatollah who issued the fatwa against Salman Rushdie has died, the rage against free speech continues. How Islamic is it to resort to violence against free speech?
Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of the Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of Quran which in more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful. I feel that it is not fair to call these acts Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema.
Much has been said about Islamist terror, does this attack lend credence to this theory?
The problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day which were considered by pious people like Imam Abu Hanifa as wayward and he preferred to die in jail rather than accept their offer of senior positions to him.
Now, these laws provide for coercion and the use of force. So as long as these laws are accepted as Muslim Law, it is very difficult to dismiss the criticism.
You had taken a principled stand against pandering to religious fundamentalism. How far has the nation travelled since your resignation from the Rajiv Gandhi ministry?
Exactly as expected. In 1986, the then PM Rajiv Gandhi announced the decision to overturn the Supreme Court’s Shah Bano judgment and the blowback was so severe that the government had to organize the unlocking of the gate in Ayodhya as a balancing act. The consequences were severe and the people suffered a great deal because the then government chose political expediency over national interests.
What do you think would be the best response by the Muslim community against those giving Fatwas against writers, poets and others exercising free speech?
First, stand up and say boldly that religion is about God-consciousness (Taqwa), it is about promoting moral and ethical behaviour, it is not an instrument to gain political power. Secondly, refuse to accept any law that conflicts with the Quran, notwithstanding the claims made by people for whom religion has become a profession and remember that Islam as a religion does not admit the need of any clergy or middlemen between the Creator and the creation as asserted by Allama Iqbal: Kyon Khaliq o Makhlooq mein Hayal Rahein Parde Peerane Kaleeesa ko Kaleesa se Hatado.
Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan on Saturday said the violent attack on Salman Rushdie goes against the teachings of Quran but added “one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema”.
Speaking to TNIE, Arif Mohammad Khan said: “Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of the Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of the Quran which is more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful.”
“I feel that it is not fair to call these acts Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema.”
He said, “the problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day.”
Excerpts from the interview.
Three decades after the ban on ‘The Satanic Verses’, when even the Ayatollah who issued the fatwa against Salman Rushdie has died, the rage against free speech continues. How Islamic is it to resort to violence against free speech?
Anything done in the name of Islam must find sanction in the book. Whatever is happening may be in accordance with laws written during the time of the Muslim Empire but goes totally against the teachings of Quran which in more than 20 verses directs the believers “to turn away from those who say things which are vain and hurtful. I feel that it is not fair to call these acts Islamic but one cannot deny that the laws which allow these acts are labelled as Muslim laws and they are also part of the syllabus in the higher courses of prominent Madrasas like Deoband and Nadwatul Ulema.
Much has been said about Islamist terror, does this attack lend credence to this theory?
The problem basically is that what is described as Muslim Law is not mostly based on Quran, rather it was laid down by individuals who were serving the governments of the day which were considered by pious people like Imam Abu Hanifa as wayward and he preferred to die in jail rather than accept their offer of senior positions to him.
Now, these laws provide for coercion and the use of force. So as long as these laws are accepted as Muslim Law, it is very difficult to dismiss the criticism.
You had taken a principled stand against pandering to religious fundamentalism. How far has the nation travelled since your resignation from the Rajiv Gandhi ministry?
Exactly as expected. In 1986, the then PM Rajiv Gandhi announced the decision to overturn the Supreme Court’s Shah Bano judgment and the blowback was so severe that the government had to organize the unlocking of the gate in Ayodhya as a balancing act. The consequences were severe and the people suffered a great deal because the then government chose political expediency over national interests.
What do you think would be the best response by the Muslim community against those giving Fatwas against writers, poets and others exercising free speech?
First, stand up and say boldly that religion is about God-consciousness (Taqwa), it is about promoting moral and ethical behaviour, it is not an instrument to gain political power. Secondly, refuse to accept any law that conflicts with the Quran, notwithstanding the claims made by people for whom religion has become a profession and remember that Islam as a religion does not admit the need of any clergy or middlemen between the Creator and the creation as asserted by Allama Iqbal: Kyon Khaliq o Makhlooq mein Hayal Rahein Parde Peerane Kaleeesa ko Kaleesa se Hatado.
-
Kerala Governor signs Ordinance to amend a provision in Lok Ayukta Act
By Express News Service
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Governor Arif Mohammed Khan on Monday signed the Ordinance to amend a provision in the Lok Ayukta Act. The Governor’s assent came a day after Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan called on him at the Raj Bhavan and explained the circumstances under which the government came out with an Ordinance to amend Section 14 of the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999.
Section 14 of the Act empowers the Lok Ayukta to remove a corrupt public official from office and deter him or her from
holding the post again. The government is of view that the provision is ‘constitutionally untenable’ and should be amended. The Opposition has accused the government of trying to weaken the Lok Ayukta through the Ordinance.
The Opposition had met the Governor and urged him not to give assent to the Ordinance. The Governor on his part chose to defer his decision on signing the Ordiance till the Chief Minister returns from abroad. During the meeting at the Raj Bhavan on Sunday, Pinarayi told the Governor that the government has received legal opinion that it could go ahead with the amendment and sought hisassent to the Ordinance.