Express Dialogues | ‘We don’t accept LDF, UDF resolution against Waqf Amendment Bill’

In an interaction with TNIE, Kottapuram Diocese Bishop Ambrose Puthenveettil and Kottappuram Vicar General Msgr Rev Rockey Roby Kalathil urge the government to intervene and resolve the issue in favour of the residents, mostly hapless fisherfolk.
Kottapuram Diocese Bishop Ambrose Puthenveettil and Kottappuram Vicar General Msgr Rev Rockey Roby Kalathil.
Kottapuram Diocese Bishop Ambrose Puthenveettil and Kottappuram Vicar General Msgr Rev Rockey Roby Kalathil.TP SOORAJ
Updated on
10 min read

The Church is at the forefront of the 610 families’ fight for ownership of their land in Munambam after the Waqf Board claimed rights over the property in this coastal village near Kochi.

In an interaction with TNIE, Kottapuram Diocese Bishop Ambrose Puthenveettil and Kottappuram Vicar General Msgr Rev Rockey Roby Kalathil urge the government to intervene and resolve the issue in favour of the residents, mostly hapless fisherfolk. The priests also assert that their fight is for all the families in Munambam, not just Christians

Could you please explain the historical background of the Munambam issue?

In 1902, the king of Travancore gave 404 acres of land and 60 acres of water [off the shoreline] on lease to Abdul Sathar Moosa Haji, who had come from Gujarat for agriculture purposes. There were many fisherfolk living in the area at that time. In 1948, Siddique Sait, the successor of Moosa Haji, registered this land at the Edappally sub-registrar office. The registered land included areas where the fisherfolk had been living for nearly a century.

How did this reach the hands of Farook College?

On November 1, 1950, Siddique Sait handed over the registered land to the management of Farook College. It was given as a ‘gift deed’. Sait was reportedly close to Moulavi Abdulla Ahmed Ali, a Chavakkad native who founded Farook College.

There are indications that Sait believed there was no use in holding the land parcel, as the 404 acres had declined to 100-odd acres due to sea erosion by then. It was registered at that time under the condition that college management should not use the land for any purposes other than educational ones. However, knowingly or unknowingly, the word ‘Waqf’ was inserted in the gift deed.

If the land had been given on lease by the Travancore king, how could it be gifted to someone else?

The fact is that he [Sait] didn’t have the right. More importantly, there were people residing in the area at that time. The whole thing was illegal.

How did the legal battle start?

A few years later, some disputes arose between the management of Farook College and the local residents. The case continued for several years following the assessment that the land had been gifted to Farook College, and court orders were not favourable to local residents. In 1974, there was a court order that the entire land belonged to Farook College. In 1975, the residents of the area formed a tenant group and filed a petition at the Paravur Munsif Court. That case went on for 12 years. In 1987, as part of a compromise, the residents of that time paid a large sum to Farook College to purchase the land — land that the community had been living in for over a century.

How much did they pay?

A sum of Rs 250 for a cent. At that time, the property prices in the nearby areas cost less than `100 a cent. So, people at that time paid 150% higher rates than the prevailing market price to buy the property, which has now been claimed by the Waqf Board. Hassan Kutty Sahib, the secretary of the college, signed about 280 land documents between 1989 and 1993.

So, it is unclear if this is indeed Waqf land…

That’s the big question. The Waqf Board’s stance is that it is theirs, arguing that Sait mentioned ‘Waqf’ in an ambiguous manner because he was not sure it was a Waqf property.

What’s the Church’s stance?

Our stance is that it’s not Waqf land. Because Waqf property cannot be given on a conditional basis. Farook College sold the land to residents after passing a resolution. Everything is documented. We stake claim only to that land. The fisherfolk have been living there for 200 years.

What triggered the current flare-up?

In 2022, the fisherfolk realised that their ownership was uncertain, as they were unable to sell or pledge their lands. These are poor fisherfolk whose lives are filled with misery and obstacles. Someone else suddenly staking claim to the land they lived all these years deepened their distress.

Some have even taken their own lives after banks rejected their applications for loans to cover essential expenses such as their children’s weddings. Children’s education has been interrupted, and some houses have collapsed, but repairs are impossible because the panchayat has denied permission. Life has come to a standstill for these families.

In a channel discussion, a Muslim League representative claimed that there were only about 150 families...

That’s grossly inaccurate. A large majority of the local church community has been affected by this issue, with about 400 families involved. Families from the Ezhava and Dheevara communities have also been impacted. People from

various backgrounds and walks of life are caught in this crisis; it is not limited to a single religious group. Most of them depend on the sea for their livelihood. They cannot stay anywhere else.

What is the Church’s take on the Centre’s Waqf Amendment Bill?

The proposed amendment of the Waqf Act is one solution. The current law overtakes the constitutional rights of the people. Any law that violates constitutional rights is against democracy. We wonder why this bill was passed without much discussion back then. There should be some amends to the Waqf Board’s powers. Especially regarding ownership of land.

So, does the Church fully back the Waqf Amendment Bill?

When the amendment is made, it should be mentioned that the changes should be implemented with retrospective effect. Only then will it be helpful for the people of Munambam. If that’s not defined, the amendment may not help the affected people. People are looking at the amendment bill with hope.

The UDF and the LDF have unanimously passed a state assembly resolution against the bill…

We do not accept that. If we accept that, justice will not be served to the affected people of Munambam.

What is the solution to this problem?

We are seeking an immediate and permanent solution; a temporary one won’t do. If the Waqf Board yet again raises a complaint, the people will be in trouble. The foremost solution is the passing of the Waqf Amendment Bill with retrospective effect. This is not a matter of religion.

What are the other solutions possible?

The second suggestion we have put forth is that the legal stance should be in favour of the people of Munambam. However, for the past two years, the case has been moving slowly. If it takes a long time, the people will struggle. We are concerned that the Waqf Board and tribunal have several unlimited powers and legal protection. This should not be there. The third suggestion is that the state government should immediately intervene and resolve the issue. Through the protest, we have prepared the ground for the chief minister to make a decision. He just needs to study the issue properly and come up with a solution.

Have you discussed the matter with Muslim community leaders?

Yes. At least a few of them believe this is not Waqf land. We also know that the Waqf Board is a politically constituted body. If the state government makes a decision, it can help solve the issue legally.

What would be appropriate — a political or a legal approach?

Both. The state government should find a solution through political dialogue, and then get it legally ratified. This is not an issue affecting the Christian community alone. Of the more than 600 families affected, 400 are Christian, and the remaining Hindu. They are agitating as a united front.

Waqf Board chairman M K Sakeer has reiterated that they would take the legal route. What’s your response?

Everything in this issue hinges on truth and justice. And some documents prove the truth. Even the Nissar Commission had pointed out that they were not the competent authority to decide whether the Munambam land belonged to Waqf.

The problem erupted after two individuals filed a case in 2019. Do you think that the issue can be sorted if the case is withdrawn? Has there been any discussion regarding this?

Yes, we have talked to people from the community regarding this. But, you should understand that even if some do agree with arriving at an amicable solution, the same thought might not occur to others in the same community.

However, since we are living in a state that upholds the value of communal harmony, we hope that people will realise the importance of safeguarding human rights and come together to solve the issue. As said earlier, this issue is not something that has affected the Christian community alone. People from other communities too are affected. So, our agitation should not be seen as a communal one.

It has been said that the two litigants are Muslim League members. Can’t the problem be solved through discussions with leaders such as P K Kunhalikutty?

Yes. In the meetings that we had held with the leaders from various political parties, including the Muslim League, it has been evident from their response that an amicable solution can be arrived at.

Did anyone from the ruling party meet the agitators, or hold discussions with you?

Earlier, the Vypeen MLA [K N Unnikrishnan] had intervened, and the state government had restored the people’s revenue rights. The residents assumed that the problem was over. However, in 2024, when they found their revenue rights revoked, they aired their worries to us. After meeting with the residents, we submitted a petition highlighting the issue at the chief minister’s public outreach programme (Nava Kerala Sadas). However, no action was taken. We had our fingers crossed. We were then told that the advocate general would take up the case in court. Yet again, we were disappointed. It was only then that we decided to resort to a hunger strike and agitation.

There seems to be some sort of religious polarisation happening in the area. The residents’ sentiments are gradually turning anti-Muslim. Is this true?

No. We don’t think so. We have been visiting the protesters every day. People from every political party and community, including the Muslim brothers, have been visiting and expressing their support to the agitators.

There are social media posts claiming that the Munnambam issue is being used to reap political benefits. What is your take on this?

You know Kerala is a politically sensitive state. There might be people who attempt to take political benefits from the issue. We go to the protest venue every day. We don’t know from where a solution would arise. We maintain a balanced approach. The Kerala Regional Latin Catholic Council (KRLCC) has a political ‘equidistance’ policy. We interact with everyone, including political parties. We will accept everyone’s support to get justice.

The BJP was the first to intervene in the Munnambam issue. Several national leaders voiced their views on the matter and, as a result, it became a national issue.

We cannot say that the BJP was the first to intervene. Local people had taken up the matter with the local CPM MLA, Unnikrishnan. The BJP intervened because the issue involved Waqf. Amending the Waqf Act is part of the BJP’s policy. That is why BJP leaders and supporters took a stand in the matter. It is the BJP that has tabled the Waqf Amendment Bill. The two main fronts in Kerala are against it. The common people are watching all these. We hope you can read between the lines.

Leader of Opposition V D Satheesan says the Munambam issue and the Waqf Amendment Bill are not connected…

We cannot support that view. Because it is the Waqf Act that has turned villain in the Munnambam issue. It is an extension of an issue with the Waqf Act. If anyone goes to the people of Munambam with such a view [as Satheesan’s], it would create problems. The people there are fighting for their existence. People, including youngsters, are closely following the Waqf Amendment Bill and related cases. Even the children are aware of the issue. All aspects of the Munnambam issue boil down to the Waqf law. If the Waqf Board gets to decide about property rights, it will affect the constitutional rights of the people.

Satheesan went on to say that a similar bill regarding properties under the church could also come up in the future, and that the Congress would stand with the church at that time. What is your response?

There is nothing to fear regarding the possibility of such a bill – fear affects only when one has gained something immorally. The Catholic Church is not going to be overly concerned about that.

The Farook College management has maintained silence on the issue. Why aren’t they speaking out?

I don’t think there is any need for them to do so. Their stance came out during the 1975 High Court case – that this was a gifted property. The statement they gave to the Nisar Commission also was the same.

So, they didn’t say it was Waqf land?

No, they didn’t.

There are indications that the Muslim League is interested in solving the issue. But an article that recently appeared in ‘Suprabhatham’, the mouthpiece of the Samastha, asserted that Munambam was a Waqf property. Do you believe Samastha’s stance reflects the general mood of the Muslim community?

There are many organisations or sections in the Muslim community. But the general feeling among the community, according to our understanding, is that the Munambam land is not Waqf property. But there may be certain opposing voices.

The issue is now not confined to Munambam alone. Three byelections are coming up, and the issue is a hot topic of discussion in these constituencies. Will the issue have a bearing on the polls?

To tell you the truth, we are not getting time to study the political scenario there. We have been spending more time at Munambam than in the office.

The chief minister, in a recent speech, said the people of Munambam will not be troubled in any way. Do you trust his words?

Yes, certainly. Because we must respect our leaders — be it the chief minister or the prime minister — in a democratic setup. It’s not about any particular party. Every politician has to be a mystic.

How do you view the BJP’s aggression in the Munambam issue?

Almost all the organisations are engaged in the issue now. You cannot claim one organisation is more active than the other one.

The BJP has been trying its best to get closer to the Christian community...

The political atmosphere in Kerala and other parts of the country are different. Because of the same, the BJP will have different plans for Kerala. The politically enlightened people of Kerala can identify these. The claim that all the Christian people support the BJP is baseless.

The Church, especially the Latin Catholic Church, has traditionally been closer to the Congress...

That’s not correct. Ever since the KRLCC was established in 2002, we have maintained an equidistant stand in political matters.

There is a narrative that Christian communities are not secure in various parts of the country where the BJP-led NDA is in power. Does the Latin Catholic Church have such a view?

We have raised our voice whenever we felt that the Christians were unsecure. An elected leader is always everyone’s representative. We do not turn our backs on anyone.

TNIE team: Cithara Paul, Rajesh Abraham, Anu Kuruvilla, Anna Jose T P Sooraj (photos), Harikrishna B (video)

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com