Take balanced stance

THE ongoing dispute between the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and various Waqf boards over the control of heritage monuments underscores the need for a balanced and thoughtful approach. The government must ensure that it upholds secularism while addressing this sensitive issue. At a recent parliamentary panel meeting, the ASI named over 120 monuments under its protection that are also claimed by Waqf boards. The ASI contends that some of these sites were declared Waqf properties long after being classified as protected heritage. The Opposition, however, accuses the ASI of misrepresenting facts and displaying political bias.

The ASI has flagged valid concerns that religious bodies are modifying or adding to the original structures, compromising the historical authenticity of these monuments. Unauthorised constructions like madarsas or washrooms built by Waqf boards have reportedly altered the original fabric of some protected sites. However, it is important to acknowledge that such structures are often linked to religious practices.

Instead of adopting a confrontational stance, both the ASI and Waqf boards should engage in dialogue to resolve these differences. A collaborative approach would help protect these monuments while also respecting religious sentiments. This conflict highlights a larger issue: many heritage sites in India also have religious significance, such as the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya or the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi. The government must clearly define the responsibilities of both the ASI and religious bodies to prevent disputes. Amending the Waqf Act and related laws could help manage such sites without infringing on heritage or religious rights, ensuring a harmonious balance between preservation and faith.