Most respectfully, we, the undersigned, submit a Memorandum to you for your gracious and sympathetic consideration: -

The hasty passage of the U.P. Regulation of Public Religious Buildings and Places Bill, 2000, by the UP Assembly and the UP Council on 5 & 6 January, 2000 without any discussion and by voice vote has distressed, agonised and shocked the religious minorities in UP, particularly the Muslim community, which constitutes 17% of the population of the State and 23% of the Muslim population of our country and given rise to countrywide protest and demand for its withdrawal.

The Bill has now been referred to you by the Governor of UP for your consent. We, the undersigned, beg to you to draw your kind attention to the draconian and unconstitutional provisions of this Bill and the real motivation behind this hasty and uncalled for legislation.

The Statement of Objects and Reasons attached to the  Bill merely gives 'ensuring public order' as its only reason; but is absolutely silent on the manner and the extent of public religious land and construction of public religious buildings in UP having caused any public order problem. Publicly, the Bill has been justified by the Chief Minister of UP and his colleagues as a measure to curb the ISI activities on the Indo-Nepal border by regulating the use and construction of Masjids and Madarsas. It needs to be placed on record that so far no Masjid or Madarsa has been prosecuted by the State authorities for involvement with the ISI. In any case the State has the necessary power and authority to deal with any subversive or anti-national activities. The Bill will not make the State administration more efficient or effective in meeting the ISI threat. There is, thus, no nexus between the provisions of the Bill and its public rationale.

The real object of the Bill is to stop the construction of Masjids and Madarsas in rural areas and to force the existing ones to close down as well as to vilify the Muslim community and thus raise the wall of distrust and suspicion against a peaceful and law-abiding people i.e. to promote the on-going mission of the Sangh Parivar.

The Bill constitutes the most serious interference with Freedom of Conscience and of Religion enshrined in our Constitution. The Bill is totally misconceived in empowering the State to determine the number of public religious places and buildings a religious community should own or construct. The Bill also violates, in particular, the religious right of a Muslim to dedicate his property to God and create a Wakf for a religious purpose e.g. religious worship, instruction, burial etc.

The Bill defines the terms 'public religious place' and public religious building in such a wide manner that even minor repair and maintenance works or temporary change in land use or structure shall invite its provisions. To require an institution in rural areas to obtain prior approval of the district authorities, which may be delayed or finally refused, is nothing short of deliberate and willful harassment and designed to exhaust the applicant into silent acquiescence.

The Bill does not provide any guidelines for the authorities for taking decision on application or information received or inquiries made. This lacunae will give rise to pick and choose, to arbitrary exercise of power by a subservient bureaucracy subject to a politically and communally motivated Executive. The absence of due safeguards against misuse of power goes against the basic concept of due process of law.

The Bill omits to make any distinction between religious buildings and places occupying private land and those which occupy public land. If the State Government was seriously concerned about mushrooming of religious places, it should have vigorously applied the laws already in force, to vacate encroachment on public land, in both urban and rural areas, in the name of religion.

The Bill makes the violation of its provisions a cognizable offence, which is not so in the case of municipal regulation of land use or construction in urban areas.

The Bill denies the right of access to the judiciary, even though a fundamental right is affected and aims at making the power of denial or delay a closely protected preserve of the political Executive.

This also militates against the Constitution. In the existing circumstances, the provisions of the Bill are certain to be used to target the religious minorities in UP, particularly the Muslim community, though, on the face of it, the Bill applies to all religious communities.

In the circumstances, we, the undersigned, respectfully request you, as we regard you as the Keeper of the Nation's Conscience, as the Defender of the Constitution and, inter alia, as the Protector of the Rights of Religious Minorities, to withhold your assent to the Bill and return.it to the State Government for reconsideration.

Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Public Religious Buildings and Places Bill, 2000

[This replaces the translation from Hindi text published in previous issue page 73 - Editor]

3. No building or place, not already used as a public religious building or public religious place before the commencement of this Act, shall, after such commencement, be used as public religious building or as public religious place, or for the construction of a public religious building except in accordance with the provisions of this Act ..

4. Any person intending to use a building as public religious building or a place as public religious place for the construction of a public religious building shall make an application therefor to the District Magistrate in the manner prescribed.

5. On receipt of an application under section 4, the District Magistrate may, after making such inquiry as he may deem necessary, by order in writing, grant the permission, unconditionally, or with such conditions as to security or otherwise as he may consider reasonable in the circumstances of the case, or refuse the permission, applied for:

Provided that no permission shall be granted, if the District Magistrate is satisfied that:

(a) it is necessary so to do in the interest of public order, morality and health;

(b) it will interfere with the right of any other religious denomination freely to profess and practise religion or to manage its own affairs in the matter or religion;

(c) the use of the building or place, applied for, is forbidden by any or is such, as would, if permitted, defeat the provisions of any law.

6. (1) Whenever the District Magistrate on receiving information and on making such inquiry, as he thinks fit, considers that in contravention of the provisions of this Act, -

(a) any building is used, or is likely to be used, as a public religious building;

(b) any place is being used, or is likely to be used, as a public religious place; or

(c) any public religious building, is being, or has been, or is likely to be constructed;

He may make an order requiring the person concerned to desist from prevent or stop, such activities or to remove the building so constructed, and if he objects so to do, to appear before him at a time and place to be fixed by the order, and show cause why the order should not be made absolute.

7. (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the District Magistrate under Section 5 or Section 6 may, within thirty days of the communication of the order to him, appeal to the commissioner ...

8. An order made under this Act by the District Magistrate, or on appeal by the Commissioner shall be final and shall not be called in question in any civil court.

UP Bill Totally Redundant in view of Existing Religious Institutions

(Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988

[In 1988, the Parliament enacted the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988, to prevent the misuse of religious institutions for political and other purposes. In view of the Act 1988, the controversial UP Regulation of Public Religious Buildings and Places Bill, 2000 appears to be totally redundant as the Government of UP can apply this Act instead of enacting a Bill which, inter alia, constitutes an assault on Freedom of Conscience and of Religion enshrined in the Constitution. The text of the substantive Section of the Act is given below - Editor]

"Section 2(f) defines the term 'religious institution' was defined as an institution for the promotion of any religion or persuasion, and includes any place or premises used as a place of public religious worship" ..

Section 4,5 and 6 prohibit the carrying of arms and ammunition into a religious institution, the use of its funds for political or illegal activities and the use of the religious fora for propagating political ideas, Section 3 details the purposes for which their use has been prohibited. The text of section 3 reads:

3. No religious institution or manager thereof shall use or allow the use of any premises belonging to, or under the control of, the institution –

(a) for the promotion or propagation of any political activity; or

(b) for the harbouring of any person accused or convicted of an offence under any law for the time being in force; or

(c) for the storing of any arms or ammunition; or

(d) for keeping any goods or articles in contravention of any law for the time being in force; or

(e) for erecting or putting up of any construction or fortification, including basements, bunkers, towers or walls without a valid licence or permission under any law for the time being in force; or

f) for the carrying on of any unlawful or subversive act prohibited under any law for the time being in force or in contravention of any order made by any court; or

(g) for the doing of any act which promotes or attempts to promote disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities; or for the carrying on of any activity prejudicial to the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India; or for the doing of any act in contravention of the provisions of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971.