As Jamaat rift in Kashmir widens, Mirwaiz and PDP pick sides - The Indian Express

A growing rift within the banned Jamaat-e-Islami has spilled into the public domain, with the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Kashmir’s chief cleric Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, backing former Jamaat chief Ghulam Mohammad Bhat in his dispute with the Justice and Development Front (JDF), which describes itself as the organisation’s political front.

The dispute centres on who represents the Jamaat and its legacy, and over the control of its properties and institutions. The contest has increasingly played out on social media, drawing political and religious figures into what was earlier largely an internal dispute.

Bhat, who served three terms as Jamaat chief, has once again distanced the banned organisation from the JDF and accused the “political front” of occupying Jamaat properties, most of which have been attached by the government under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

In a video statement, Bhat said the Jamaat had accepted the government’s ban while reserving its right to challenge it in court.

“When we have accepted the ban, how can we participate in any political activity?” Bhat asked. “We are not associated with any political party.”

Bhat, who was also the founding chairman of the Falah-e-Aam Trust, a Jamaat-linked educational body, also accused the JDF of taking over its office in Srinagar.

“When I was the chairman of the Trust or as Jamaat chief, I always de-linked Falah-e-Aam Trust from any political or social activity of Jamaat. It was purely for education. Why have they (JDF) made it a political centre? We have a right to defend it,” he said.

Reacting to Bhat’s statement, former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister and PDP president Mehbooba Mufti said the government was “bound to act in accordance with law”. “Since the Jammat leadership has publicly stated that it will abide by the decision of the judiciary and challenge the ban through due process of law, the government is equally bound to act in accordance with the law and due process,” Mufti said. “It must ensure that no coercive or irreversible action is taken in respect of the attached properties while the matter remains sub judice.”

“The rule of law requires equal treatment, procedural fairness, and respect for judicial authority. It cannot be applied selectively or at the discretion of those in power,” she added.

Mufti’s intervention drew a sharp response from the JDF, which accused the PDP of having a vested interest in the dispute.

“The Jamaat leadership is neither PDP’s making nor its choosing. The Jamaat’s current head Ghulam Qadir Wani along with the government-recognised panel, has rejected PDP’s interference in Jamaat affairs,” JDF president Shameem Ahmad Thoker said.

“Those hiding behind others for personal political gains will soon be exposed. No one will be allowed to decide who represents the real Jamaat,” he said.

Thoker said the “Shura-backed Jamaat panel and the JDF-backed political voice” would continue to advocate democratic participation and elections.

“The political landscape is changing. This time, the victim will decide its own fate, not the victor,” he said, referring to Jamaat sympathisers who had backed the PDP in previous Assembly elections, particularly in south Kashmir.

As the JDF and PDP traded accusations, Mirwaiz also backed Bhat’s position, calling the statement by the Jamaat chief “concerning”.

“The public statement by the Jamaat chief is concerning. It would be in the interest of peace and stability that New Delhi listens to people’s pleas and revisit its policy of bans on social and political organisations in Jammu and Kashmir, bringing an end to the harassment and intimidation that accompanies such restrictions,” Mirwaiz said.

He added that where such restrictions were challenged in court, “due process” should be allowed to run its course. “Attached properties and institutions should be treated with restraint and in accordance with law and judicial process,” he added.

As reported earlier by The Indian Express, the Jamaat has written to the Deputy Commissioner of Shopian over the property dispute, questioning how the rival group was allowed to put up its signboard on properties seized by the government.

The JDF, meanwhile, has sought to challenge Bhat’s assertions.

At a press conference, former Jamaat deputy chief Ahmadullah Parray said Bhat had spoken of pursuing a legal battle against the ban last year as well, but had not acted on it. Parray, however, has not publicly announced his association with the JDF.

“To raise this issue again on social media, to raise fingers at the Constitutional proceedings and create doubts is a moment of reflection for us and all the government institutions,” Parray said.

“In which capacity, is he (Bhat) time and again talking against our legal activities and creating confusion among our sympathisers?” he asked.

Parray also claimed that the panel that eventually culminated in the JDF had been constituted with the permission of former members of the Jamaat’s executive council.

He denied that the JDF had taken over the Falah-e-Aam Trust office in Srinagar, saying that only a few rooms adjacent to the main building had been taken on rent under an agreement.

The JDF’s attempt to position itself as the political voice of the Jamaat, however, has not found broad support among its senior leadership. Several top Jamaat leaders have either remained silent or publicly distanced the organisation from the JDF.

Among them are three former chiefs — Bhat, Mohammad Abdullah Wani and Sheikh Ghulam Hassan, who recently died.

With only a handful of senior Jamaat figures, including its current head Ghulam Qadir Wani, Ghulam Qadir Lone and Ahmadullah Parray, seen as siding with the JDF, the political front is yet to attract significant support among the Jamaat cadre.

Bashaarat Masood is a Special Correspondent with The Indian Express. He has been covering Jammu and ... Read More