KOZHIKODE: An interfaith marriage between a Muslim girl and a Hindu boy from a ‘Communist’ family has become the new propaganda material for the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) to campaign against the threat faced by the Muslim community ‘from atheists and irreligious groups’.
Prabhath married Sahala of Taliparamba in Kannur district under the Special Marriages Act last month. IUML said it is the latest example of the ‘Communist conspiracy’ to destroy Islam, which was referred to by party leader K M Shaji in his December 9 speech at the Waqf Protection Rally in Kozhikode.
The party acting state general secretary P M Salam cited the marriage as the example of how a Muslim loses his or her religious belief when the person enters the Communist fold. Speaking at a programme at Padanna in Kasaragod on Monday, Salam said Sahala exited not just from the IUML, but from Islam itself. “This was what Shaji had cautioned. Sahala went out of Islam. Such a situation should not happen in our families,” Salam said.
Islamic scholar Bahaudeen Muhammad Nadvi Kooriyad, who is seen as close to the IUML leadership, had said Communists are trying to create an irreligious society by promoting ‘living together and interfaith marriages. ’Reacting to Sahala’s marriage, Kooriyad said the history of places where the Communists ruled show that they had attempted to spread atheism.
Meanwhile, CPM Kannur district secretary MV Jayarajan said the party has nothing to say because marriage is a matter between two individuals. “The IUML may say many things. It is better to ask the couple about the incident,” he said. In a video posted on social media, Sahala refuted the IUML allegation that CPM workers had kidnapped her. “We married under the Special Marriages Act after giving one-month prior notice,” she said. Sahala alleged IUML workers have seized her parents’ mobile phone to prevent her from contacting them. “The ‘controversy’ was raked up by local IUML workers,” she said.
Social activist Sreeja Neyyattinkara said the IUML is speaking against the constitutional right of an individual. “Religion or politics have no role in the selection of a partner by an adult individual,” she said. “Constitutional rights should be placed above parents’ sentiment. This was what we said in the Hadiya case and we reiterate that stand now,” Sreeja said.