107
Chapter IV
LEADERSHIP OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY AND NON-
LEAGUE ORGANIZATIONS
Apart from the Indian Union Muslim League, numerous organizations
have been working among the Muslims of Kerala in the socio-political,
educational, cultural and religious spheres since the first quarter of the 20th century.
Each group offers different interpretations to various religious issues, customs and
practices, and social change and modernity. Some organizations among them are
political in nature, outlook and function whereas others harbour social and
religious ideals and objectives. Whatever be the primary concerns of these
organizations, all of them ultimately consider Muslim community and its affairs as
the reference point. Stated differently, though these organizations differ from each
other and compete among themselves for a niche among the Muslim masses, they
primarily focus – at least outwardly – on the issues affecting the community. This
Chapter seeks to discuss the role of these organs in social change in the
community. The Chapter is divided into two sections: first section is a discussion
on the nature and history of various types of Non-League political outfits and the
second section seeks to analyse the same with regard to various socio-religious and
educational organizations.
Non-Muslim League political organizations – viewed both in a political and
social sense – are numerous in number, though some of them have already become
defunct. Cochin Muslim Education Association (1917), All Travancore Muslim
Association (1935), All India Muslim Majilis (1945), Travancore State Muslim
League (1945), Travancore-Cochin Muslim League (1949), All Kerala State
Muslim League (1957), All India Muslim League (1973), People’s Democratic
Party (1993), National Democratic Front (1993) and Indian National League
(1994) are/were formations which could be considered political in nature. On the
other hand, Jamat-e-Islami (1941), Kerala Naduvathul Mujahid (KNM, 1950), and the
two Sunni factions (1989) are religious in character whereas Muslim Educational
Society (MES, 1964), and Muslim Service Society (MSS, 1980) mainly cater to the
108
social and educational needs of the community. As already stated, some of these
formations have become non-entities in the socio-political landscape of Kerala
whereas few others have only token presence. Among the existing organizations,
the following needs elaborate discussion in regard to their history, objectives and
activities so that a discerning student of Muslim sociology and politics could gather
a comprehensive picture of the subject matter.
1.1. All India Muslim League and Indian National League
Of the Non-Muslim League organizations, All India Muslim League
(AIML) and Indian National League (INL) need primary mention. One obvious
reason for this is that both of them are break-away factions of the Indian Union
Muslim League. These parties separated themselves from the parent organization
on various grounds and at various periods. Further, when compared to other Non-
League political formations – for instance, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and
National Democratic Front (NDF) – both these parties have established themselves
in the state’s political mainstream and have also shared political power by
associating themselves with the two alliances, United Democratic Front (UDF)
and the Left Democratic Front (LDF). Also other parties – PDP and NDF, for
example - have the stigma of extremism attached to them.
Of the above two political parties, All India Muslim League was the first to
be formed. As is the case in majority of the instances, here also it was political
power and influence which gave birth to dissident activities in the League and the
resultant formation of AIML. In order to understand the circumstances leading to
its formation, it is necessary to have a brief look at the power struggle within the
Muslim Legue since 1960. Two such struggles were the ones that took place on the
eve of the 1960 Assembly elections and the other in 1966. In a sense both struggles
had a Communist connection to them. For instance, 1960 saw a minor split in the
League when a new outfit – Progressive Muslim League (PML) - was carved out of
it by a section of the party men which was alleged to be ‘the creation of CPI with a
view to fragment the Muslim votes’ [Radhakrishnan, 2004: 85]. In the election
(1960), the new outfit even contested in some constituencies with the tacit support
109
of the Communist Party though after the election, nothing more was heard about it
[Azeez, 1992: 63]. The second split had an even more explicit Communist
connection as fierce debate took place in the League over its relationship with the
Congress Party and, hence, about the need to have a better understanding with the
Communists. This actually resulted in the formation of two lobbies – (pro and anti-
Communists) - in the party subsequently leading to the next split and formation of
the Samasta Kerala Muslim League [Panicker, 1976: 116]. However, both splits
were short-lived and were also of little consequence as far as the League was
concerned. Thus it proved that it could easily manage such dissident activities and
showed that the base of the party was strong enough to be challenged by these
groups who had little popular clout.
However, later, in the 1970s, dissident activities within the League began to
assume a menacing proportion once again. Trouble broke out on the eve of the Lok
Sabha by-election to Manjeri (1973) when C.H. Mohammed Koya, MLA
representing Kondotty constituency and Minister for Education in the then United
Front Government headed by C.Achutha Menon, was asked to resign from the
Cabinet to contest the by-election. It was alleged that Mohammed Koya
unwillingly left the Ministry on the demand of Bafaky Thangal (President) who,
according to this account, took such a decision in the interest of a splinter group
within the party. However, the issue persisted even after the death of Bafaky
Thangal as the new President - Pukkoya Thangal - had to name a Minister and a
candidate for Kondotty. Inspite of pressure from certain quarters to make
M.Moideen Kutty Haji as Minister and P. M. Aboobakar as the candidate, he
acted on his own and nominated Chakeeri Ahmed Kutty and M.P.M. Abdulla
Kutty Kurikkal respectively as Minister and the candidate for election. Soon
infighting broke out among the top leaders of the party and gradually it percolated
to the lower ranks [Azeez, op.cit., 108-09]. There was also another reason for
aggravating the situation which was related to the handling of the Home Portfolio
by the Congress Party. Many in the League were dissatisfied with this and also
there was much heart burn in regard to the Land Reform Bill, Forest Protection
Bill and Agricultural Workers Bill moved by the United Front Government.
Difference of opinion between the two parties now reached a point of no return
110
and hence demand for the withdrawal of the League from the Ministry became
vocal. In fact the group led by Ummer Bafaky Thangal and C.P Mammukeyi
raised this issue very strongly. The League Executive and State Council meeting on
9th March 1974 witnessed a heated debate and the meeting concluded with the
decision to empower the President to take an appropriate decision in this regard
[Azeez, op.cit., 109-10].
In the meantime the dissidents under the leadership of Ummer Bafaky
Thangal also began to level criticisms against the League Ministers besides fanning
the flame of anti-Congress feelings [Radhakrishnan, op.cit., 146]. Thus the
immediate objective of the dissidents was loud and clear – to pull out of the
Ministry failing which press for a split in the party and they soon opted for the
latter course and as a prelude to this a split occurred in the Calicut Municipal
Corporation Council. It may be recalled that a Congress-League Alliance, called
Poura Munnani (People’s Front) was in power in the Corporation. Some
disturbances took place there when a Congress Municipal Councilor (Vice-
Chairman), joined the League and subsequently defected to the Congress fold. It
was alleged that the Congress had breached faith and showed political immorality
in this issue. Dissidents under P. M. Aboobakar, the Muslim League leader in the
Corporation, decided to break away from the Poura Munnani, without consulting
the City League Committee or League Working Committee which naturally
invited disciplinary actions against them. In the meantime, the dissidents also
organized a Youth League Conference at Calicut against the plea of the party
President. Soon dissident leaders, Ummar Bafaky Thangal and C.K.P. Cheriya
Mammukoyi, were removed from the Direct Board of the Chandrika, party daily.
As a reprisal to it, the dissidents expelled Avukhaderkutty Naha (Minister) from
the Legislature Party leadership and elected Moideen Kutty Haji as the leader.
Further, on 31st March 1975, the dissidents decided to withdraw their support to
the Ministry and Moideen Kutty Haji, the then Speaker and the group leader,
resigned from office. The official group sharply reacted to this and suspended all
dissident MLAs except K. P. Raman from the League Assembly Party. With this
the rift between the two groups was complete and on 2nd April, 1975, the All India
111
Muslim League was formed at a meeting held at Thalassery [Azeez, op.cit., 210-
12]. Following the split, the AIML became a constituent of the LDF led by the
CPI(M). After the 1967-69 alliance between the Communist Party and the Muslim
League, it was the second experiment of the former to align with a Muslim outfit to
gather Muslim votes.
However, the sojourn of the party with the LDF was short-lived. Though it
shared power along with the Front following the 1982 election to the Legislative
Assembly, the relationship between AIML and the CPI(M) was not all that
smooth. The Supreme Court judgment on Shabanu Case (1985)1 and proposal for a
Common Civil Code sealed the fate of this relationship. It was a controversial
divorce law suit that created considerable debate and controversy about the
desirability of having different civil codes for different religions, especially for
Muslims in India. The Muslims felt threatened by what they perceived as an
encroachment on the Muslim Personal Law and, therefore, naturally protested
against it. On the other side, some non-religious organizations and activists
strongly argued in favour of the judgment. E.M.S. Nambudirippad, a master-brain
of CPI(M), joined issue in the ongoing debate arguing for a uniform civil code in
his writings and public speeches. On the other side, various Muslim outfits, both
political as well as social, came around and they put up a brave front against the
CPI(M) stand and argued for the continuance of Islamic Shariat. This placed the All
India Muslim League in a tight spot. While its social base consisting solely of the
Muslim population stood for a religion-based law of inheritance, the political front
of which it was a partner articulated a diametrically opposite stand. Party
leadership rightly understood that continuance of the alliance with the CPI(M)
would be suicidal for it. By now, India Union Muslim League also changed the
rigid stand it had taken earlier and sent clear signals to the AIML leadership for a
truce. This, in fact, was a straw as far as that party (AIML) was concerned and
hence it took the final initiative to end the more than half-a-decade old alliance
with the Left Democratic Front, and to merge with the Muslim League (August
1985).
112
Needless to say, the All India Muslim League at the time of the split from
the parent party wanted to project itself as an alternative to the Muslim League,
both politically as well as socially. Its calculation was that if it could emerge as the
predominant, if not the sole voice of the Muslim masses, it could make use of that
position to mobilize them politically and make a hard bargain with the LDF from a
position of strength. LDF, particularly the CPI(M), on its part also wanted to foist
AIML as a counter to the League so that its influence among the Muslim
population could be neutralised or at least balanced. This was the cold calculation
on both sides. However, electoral statistics belied all expectations which was clear
from the performance of the party at the polls in all the three election since its
inception as a separate political party. Tables 4.1 and 4.2 make this clear.
Table 4.1
Assembly Constituencies AIML Contested (1977 – 1982)
Sl.No Constituency Results of the contest
1977 1980 1982
1. Kasargod F Nil F
2. Peringalom Nil Nil W
3. Edakkad W W Nil
4. Meppayur F W W
5. Kozhikodu II W W W
6. Kunnamangalom W W W
7. Manjeri F F F
8. Malappuram F F F
9. Kondotty F F F
10. Thirurangadi F Nil Nil
11. Thanur F Nil Nil
12. Thirur F F F
13. Kuttippuram F F F
14. Mankada F F F
15. Guruvayoor F Nil Nil
16. Alwye F Nil Nil
17. Mattancherry Nil W F
18. Kazhakkuttom F Nil Nil
Total Contested 16 11 12
Secured 03 05 04
Note : F – Failed; W - Won
Source : Election Commission of India, Statistical Reports on General Election to the Legislative
Assembly of Kerala, 1977, 1980 and 1982, Election Commission, New Delhi.
113
Table 4.2
Voting Trend in Assembly Constituencies AIML Contested (1977 – 1982)
Sl.No Constituency
Votes polled by the AIML and its Opponents
1977 1980 1982
AIML Opponent AIML Opponent AIML Opponent
1. Kasargod 22619 29402 ML Nil Nil 15643 25676ML
2. Peringalom Nil Nil Nil Nil 38825 19973INC
3. Edakkad 34266 30947INC 39843 29886JP Nil Nil
4. Meppayur 34808 40642 ML 43851 36044 ML 42022 34835 ML
5. Kozhikodu II 33531 32433 ML 40160 34931JP 35109 29155Ind
6. Kunnamangalom 30289 SC 28601CPI 35234 SC 31173INC 28901 SC 27266Ind
7. Manjeri 16807 43626 ML 21905 43209 ML 19031 38681 ML
8. Malappuram 15724 39362 ML 17272 36602 ML 13500 35464 ML
9. Kondotty 20159 41731 ML 26650 41848 ML 20885 37671 ML
10. Thirurangadi 21479 40540 ML Nil Nil Nil Nil
11. Thanur 12158 42886 ML Nil Nil Nil Nil
12. Thirur 26127 41675 ML 36201 38469 ML 30571 36315 ML
13. Kuttippuram 12023 36367 ML 15703 33863 ML 13263 31521 ML
14. Mankada 26207 33597 ML 31861 35623 ML 28845 33208 ML
15. Guruvayoor 20071 34063 ML Nil Nil Nil Nil
16. Alwye 36259 37017INC Nil Nil Nil Nil
17. Mattancherry Nil Nil 26543 24757JP 24031 25589 ML
18. Kazhakkuttom 22637 37014INC Nil Nil Nil Nil
Total
Total votes 385164 589903 335223 386405 310626 375354
Contested 16 16 11 11 12 12
Secured 03 13 05 06 04 08
Notes : CPI - Communist Party of India; INC – Congress; JP – Janata Party; Ind. - Independent
(UDF); ML - Muslim League; SC - Reserved for SC.
Source : Election Commission, op.cit.
114
As stated earlier, in electoral politics the AIML was supposed to be a force
to bring the Muslim votes to the LDF fold. That was why in the 1977 election, first
election since its formation, it was given sixteen seats to contest, mostly against the
parent organization. However, the election result showed that the All India
Muslim League could not prove to be a strong opponent to the League in its
strongholds in Calicut and Malappuram districts [Radhakrishnan, op.cit., 153].
Out of the 16 candidates fielded by the party, 12 had as their opponent candidates
belonging to the Muslim League, including eight in Malappuram district, where
the League had a clear edge. Among the three seats it won – only one (Kozhikode
II) – was snatched from the parent organization. On the whole, it got 3,85,164
votes as against 5,89,903 votes harnessed by its opponents and this meant 4.39 per
cent of the total valid votes at the state level and 39.86 per cent of the total valid
votes in the seats it contested [Election Commission, 1977: 8]. In the 1980
elections, the party contested five seats less than it did in the previous election. To
put it plainly it was given only eleven seats this time as against 16 in the 1977
election. This ineffect meant a realization by the LDF of its declining importance
vis-à-vis the Indian Union Muslim League. And of these eleven seats, the party this
time won five seats, two more than its previous tally with 3,35,223 votes against
3,86,405 of its opponents. This was 3.51 per cent of the state total and 46.08 per
cent of votes polled in all the eleven seats taken together, and this meant an
increase of 6.22 per cent from the 1977 polls. The success rate also increased this
time with 45.45 per cent compared to the 18.75 percent in the previous case. In
1980, there were seven constituencies, including six in Malappuram district, where
the AIML had a face-to-face fight with IUML. Among them, the former had won
only one (Meppayur) along with other four. The last election AIML contested as a
separate political party was the one which was held in 1982. It was given twelve
seats and in four of them the party candidates got elected. Nine seats, including six
in Malappuram district, witnessed a fight between the two League outfits. This
time around also it could win just one seat – Meppayur – and in all the rest Muslim
League emerged successful. Votes polled came to 3,10,626. It was 3.25 per cent of
the total valid votes in the state and 40.86 percent of the votes in the constituencies
contested.
115
Table 4.3
AIML- IUML Contests in Malappuram District, 1977 - 1982
Constituency 1977 1980 1982
AIML IUML IUML IUML AIML IUML
Manjeri 16807 43626 21905 43209 19031 38681
Malappuram 15724 39362 17272 36602 13500 35464
Kondotty 20159 41731 26650 41848 20885 37671
Thirurangadi 21479 40540 Nil Nil Nil Nil
Thanur 12158 42886 Nil Nil Nil Nil
Thirur 26127 41675 36201 38469 30571 36315
Kuttippuram 12023 36367 15703 33863 13263 31521
Mankada 26207 33597 31861 35623 28845 33208
Total 150684 319784 149592 229614 126095 212860
Difference 169100
(52.88 per cent) 80022
(34.85 per cent) 86765
(40.76 per cent) Source : Election Commission, op.cit.
Electoral performance of the AIML thus gave a clear indication that it
would not be able to act as a match to the Muslim League as it failed to make dent
in the traditional support which the Muslim community has been extending to that
party. In the contests between the two parties in the three elections, the AIML had
won a total of 2,61,713, 1,93,443 and 1,65,769 respectively against 4,56,324,
2,65,658 and 2,64,125, respectively of the IUML [Election Commission, 1977,
1980 and 1982]. Thus, IUML had a clear edge over its rival by securing a margin of
1,94,611 (42.65 per cent) votes in 1977; 92,215 (27.18 per cent) votes in 1980; and
98,356 (32.24 per cent) in the 1982 elections. This shows that the AIML lost each
seat to the League for an average vote share of 16,218 in 1977, 10,316 votes in 1980
and 10,928 in 1982. Again, interestingly, in the case of the constituencies where
the League won against the AIML, the margin of victory was notable: 1,87,828 in
1977, 64,408 in 1980 and 91,169 in 1982. This means that AIML lost each seat for
an average difference of 17,075 (1977), 10,735 (1980) and 11,396 (1982). At the
116
same time, the margin in seats where the AIML defeated the League was very
small 6,783 (1970), 7,807 (1980) and 7,187 (1982) votes.
This would be clear if one looks at the Malappuram district. The League
had a thumbing victory both in terms of seats and votes, all the time. The party
defeated its AIML opponents with a sizeable margin, fairly better than the margin
of victory it had in other constituencies. Calculations show that the League had a
huge difference of 1,69,100 (52.88 per cent) with an average surplus of 21,138 votes
in each seat in 1977; 80,022 (34.85 per cent) with a surplus of 13,337 votes in 1980;
and 86,705 (40.76 per cent) with a surplus of 14,461 votes in the 1982 elections.
1.2. The Indian National League
Significantly the next round of split in the IUML and the consequent
formation of the Indian National League (INL) were also related to the party’s
relationship with the Indian National Congress. This time around, the immediate
provocation was the demolition of the Babri Masjid2 on 6th December, 1992. A
section of the League under the leadership of Ibrahim Sulaiman Sait argued for the
immediate termination of the alliance with the Congress and as the leadership did
not pay heed to this demand, they walked out of the party along with U. A. Beeran
(the then Thirurangadi MLA) and P. M. Aboobaker (the then Guruvayoor MLA),
and formed another political party INL [Radhakrishnan, op. cit., 224-25]. Officially,
it was launched in 1994 and, compared to IUML, its social base was confined to
certain strong holds in the Malappuram district, viz., Tanur, Parappanangdi and
Manjeri. Ibrahim Sulaiman Sait, a leader with a nation-wide appeal, was the
moving force behind the party. To him, the Left parties were more sensitive than
the Congress on many issues affecting the secular fabric of the country and also on
issues affecting the Muslim population. As far as the LDF was concerned,
calculation was that erosion of the League in its strongholds meant eroding the
strength of the UDF in state politics.
All these created an atmosphere in favour of a close relationship between
the INL and the LDF though, till now, this continues only as electoral
understanding without accommodating the party either in the Front as a full
117
partner or in the Ministries led by the CPI(M). This ‘touch-me-notism’ of the LDF
and its leader CPI(M) has been a heartburn for the INL leadership. It is well aware
of the fact that to keep its social base intact it has not merely to find
accommodation in either of the two political fronts but also has to gain a share in
political power. Being in power actually has two implications : only under such a
situation it could ‘serve’ the interest of the Muslim community, at least in a
minimal sense; and the same (sharing of power) is also needed for distribution of
patronage. Out of power perpetually, therefore, means political wilderness and
erosion in the social base. For, after all, without political power or atleast a
prospect of obtaining it, how could a party survive? The question assumes a rare
salience in the Kerala situation where politics is bipolar and also where politics is
controlled, to a certain extent, by caste/communal forces. This is the greatest
dilemma INL faces and this has also been a major issue of discussion within the
party. In fact this has even resulted in a minor split in the party with a splinter
group led by Siraj Sait merging with the IUML prior to the Assembly poll of 2011
[Malatyala Manorama, 2011].
After the emergence of the INL, the first election to be held in the state was
the one to the civic bodies in 1995. Along with the People’s Democratic Party
(PDP), another non-League political platform, INL formed an alliance called
‘People’s Front’, with the primary object of taking on the League in its strongholds.
It contested (People’s Front) on its own in certain Muslim majority constituencies
and in others lent tacit support to the LDF. In this election, the Muslim League
faced defeat even in the Malappuram district. The party lost its hold in all the five
Municipalities in Malappuram district, first ever in the electoral history of Kerala.
Thus, the CPI(M) got an opportunity to get a space in Muslim pockets with the
help of the INL. Another experiment was in the by-election to the Guruvayoor
constituency, following the resignation of P.M.Aboobaker who joined INL. In the
election, LDF fielded P.T.Kunju Muhammed, an independent, against Abdul
Samad Samadani of the Muslim League. The INL extended wholehearted support
to the LDF and in Kerala politics, this is described as the ‘Guruvayur Strategy’.
Since the 1996 elections to the Legislative Assembly, INL began to contest the
118
general elections with the support of the LDF. Following Table makes clear its
electoral performance.
Table 4.4
Performance of INL in Constituencies it Contested alone: 1996 Election
Name of Constituency Votes polled Percentage
Kannur 4476 4.85
Edakkad 115 0.10
Koilandy 389 0.31
Perambra 390 0.32
Koduvally 1968 1.74
Kozhikode - II 138 0.14
Beypore 146 0.11
Kunnamangalam (SC) 296 0.27
Wandoor (SC) 458 0.40
Manjeri 301 0.29
Mankada 528 0.48
Mannarkkad 337 0.29
Total 9542 3.94
Source : Election Commission of India, 1996, op. cit., pp. 8 & 155-65
In the 1996 elections, held simultaneously to the Lok Sabha and Assembly,
INL candidates got the support of the LDF in two Assembly segments,
Malappuram and Kuttipuram [Radhakrishnan, op. cit., 229-30]. The party polled
54,319 votes as against 99,536 polled by the League. Besides this, the INL also
contested on its own in 12 constituencies, including two constituencies reserved for
Schedule Castes (Table 4.4). However, it could gather only 9,542 votes from all
these constituencies. As per the official data of the Election Commission, the party
got only 0.45 per cent of the total valid votes in the state and 3.94 per cent of votes
in the seats contested [Election Commission, 1996: 8]. In the Lok Sabha (1996)
Election, the presence of the PDP and INL resulted in the fragmentation of the
Muslim votes which proved fatal for the League candidates. In Manjeri, votes
polled by the League came down to 47.25 per cent and in Ponnai to 48.98 per cent
119
in the place of 51.3 and 53.08 per cent, respectively in 1991 [The New Indian
Express, 1996]. In the Civic Elections (2000), the INL contested alone and the
result, as could be inferred, was unimpressive. In the 2001 Assembly elections, the
scenario underwent a drastic change with CPI(M) offering electoral support to the
party (INL).
Table 4.5
Assembly Constituencies where INL Contested During 2001 – 2011 Elections
Constituencies
Votes polled by INL and its Opponents
2001 2006 2011
NL Opponent NL Opponent NL Opponent
Kasargod NC NA 27790 38774 ML 53068 43330 ML
Kannur 38947 58080 NC NA NC NA
Kuthuparamba NC NA NC NA 53861 57164
Kozhikodu II NC NA 51130 37037 ML NC NA
Manjeri NC NA 61274 76646 ML NC NA
Vengara NC NA NC NA 24901 63138 ML
Tirur 45511 58270 ML NC NA NC NA
Total Votes 84458
(38.98)
116350
(53.70)
140194
(40.61)
152457
(44.16)
131830
(28.55)
163632
(51.98)
Notes : ML - Muslim League; NL - National League; NC – Not Contested;
NA – Not Applicable (National League had not contested in the constituency, this time)
Sources : Election Commission, Statistical Reports On General Election to the Legislative Assembly of Kerala - 2001, 2006 and 2011, Election Commission, New Delhi.
In the elections the party fielded two candidates as LDF independents in
Kannur and Tirur constituencies, but lost to the Congress and the Muslim League,
respectively. It had polled only 38.98 per cent votes from these seats, while the
opponents polled 53.70 per cent. In the next election to the civic bodies (2005)
CPI(M) entered into local alliance with the INL and reaped rich dividend out of it.
For instance, it came to power in Tenjippalom Panchayat with the support of the
lone INL member and the same also stood in good stead for the party in Talannur
Grama Panchayat. In the 2006 Assembly election, this relationship continued and
120
INL contested three seats (Kasargod, Kozhikode-II and Manjeri) out of which it
won one (Kozhikode II) against the Muslim League. In the simultaneous elections
to the Lok Sabha, the CPI(M) gained Manjeri seat (Lok Sabha) and the support of
the INL here proved crucial. Further, Muslim League had to sweat profusely for
winning the Manjeri seat to the Legislative Assembly due to the active presence of
the INL there [Prakash, 2010]. The INL polled an aggregate of 1,40,194 votes,
which was 0.90 per cent of the state average and 40.61 per cent of votes in the seats
contested. It is, however, worth noting that despite the electoral alliance, INL did
not get any berth in the cabinet. Instead, it was given the chairmanship of a Board
and a Corporation.3
In the 2011 Assembly poll, INL contested in three constituencies
(Kasargod, Kuthuparamba and Vengara), with the active help of the LDF. The
election, however, proved disastrous for the party – all of its candidates failed and
the votes polled by them also fell drastically. Its three candidates altogether won
only 28.55 per cent of the votes (95,229 in absolute terms) while the opponents got
51.98 per cent. In the Kasargod constituency, INL was reduced to the third
position where the BJP became the immediate opponent of the League with 37.08
per cent of the votes polled. In Vengara constituency in the Malappuram district,
it got only 25.05 per cent votes when its League opponent got 63.53 per cent. The
only saving grace for the party came from Koothuparamba where its candidate
(S.A.Puthiyavalappil) put up a decent show by polling 45.93 per cent votes against
48.75 per cent of the Socialist Janata Dal.
1.3. The People’s Democratic Party
The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) was formed in 1993 and its origin
could be really traced back to the Islamic Seva Sangh (ISS) formed in 1989, a
militant Islamic group led by Abdul Nazar Mau’dani with the aim of protecting the
interest of the community from the assault of Hindu ‘fundamentalist’ groups.
Mau’dani was a religious scholar and an eloquent orator whose speech attracted a
section of the Muslims, especially the youth. In passing, it needs to be mentioned
that the ISS was the first militant organization among the Muslims of Kerala
121
though it was not received well by the mass of the people who were very much part
and parcel of a plural culture and secular world view. It is another thing that the
organization was banned by the Central Government due to its militant nature and
extremist outlook. It was under this circumstance that it changed its nomenclature
and formed a new party with the name PDP.
The Party, according to its Constitution, stands for the uplift of all
marginalized sections irrespective of religious or communal considerations and,
since its inception it was highly critical of the Muslim League for its failure in
protecting the interest of the community. Interestingly, both the LDF and UDF
continue to have covert or overt understanding with the PDP with a view to
reducing the influence of the Muslim League [Radhakrishnan, op. cit., 260]. For
instance, in 1996, the LDF arranged a platform for Abdul Nazar Mau’dani in
Thalassery, when E.K.Nayanar, the then Chief Minister, contested in the by-
election to the Assembly against Adv. Asif Ali. Not to be left behind in this race,
United Democratic Front also tried to woo the party a number of times,
particularly during periods of elections.
In electoral politics, PDP had tried to make its presence felt since the civic
polls of 1995. Here it is important to note that the party contested the election by
fielding its own candidates in only two elections, 1995 and 2011 Assembly
elections. In the elections that were held in between (between 1995 and 2011), the
party merely extended its support to either of the two Fronts – LDF and UDF. For
instance, in the 2001 election the support was for the UDF and in 2006 it offered
support to the LDF. Its role along with INL was expected to jolt the fortunes of the
Muslim League atleast in Malappuram district. Needless to say, the popular base
of a political party is tested mainly through its performance in elections to the
various representative bodies, whether it is the State Legislature or the Parliament.
In Kerala, such an opportunity came to the PDP for the first time in 1996. In the
elections, it adopted a policy to field its own candidates in constituencies
(Legislative Assembly) wherever it has a sizable base and which is strong enough
to challenge League candidates, and in the case of Lok Sabha, Manjeri and Ponnai
were selected as a test case. However, for the remaining seats, both in the
122
Assembly and Lok Sabha, it did not have a clear stand. Following Table shows its
performance in the election to the Legislative Assembly.
Table 4.6
District-wise Performance of PDP in 1996
District PDP
contested Votes polled
Votes percentage
Kannur 02 607 0.29
Kozhikode 03 1211 0.35
Malappuram 11 22753 2.19
Palakkad 07 6292 0.88
Ernakulam 04 14562 3.85
Kottayam 02 800 0.46
Alappuzha 05 8761 1.74
Pathanamthitta 02 1606 0.84
Kollam 06 24599 4.03
Thiruvananthapuram 08 21035 2.76
Total 50 102226 0.21
Note : Votes and percentage distribution are calculated on the basis of the total votes polled in the constituencies wherever the PDP contested.
Source : Election Commission, 1996, op. cit., pp. 156-89.
To the Assembly, PDP contested in 50 constituencies from 10 districts.
Among the candidates so fielded, 16 were non-Muslims including four in
constituencies reserved for Scheduled Castes. The highest number of candidates
was in Malappuram district where 11 candidates including three non-Muslims
were on the fray. On the whole, from all the seats contested, it polled 1,02,226
votes, which was 0.72 per cent of the total votes polled at the state level and 2.04
per cent of the aggregate votes in the seats the party contested [Election
Commission, 1996: 8]. District-wise analysis of votes shows that Kollam, the home
district of Mau’dani, stands first (24,599) followed by Malapppuram (22,753),
Thiruvanthapuram (21,035) and Ernakulam (14,562). It is to be noted that it
gained only 22,753 votes from the largest Muslim populated district (Malappuram),
123
though it contested 11 seats. The party got the highest number of votes (4,803)
from the Ponnani constituency, where the UDF fielded a non-Muslim candidate
(P.T. Mohanakrishnan) against Paloli Muhammed Kutty (CPI - M, won by a
Table 4.7
Constituencies in which PDP polled 2000 and above votes (1996)
Sl.No Constituency Votes polled Votes
percentage
1. Wandoor (SC) 2827 2.48
2. Manjeri 2014 6.93
3. Malappuram 2046 2.23
4. Tanur 3182 3.51
5. Tirur 2160 2.00
6. Ponnani 4803 4.65
7. Mattancherry 5238 8.83
8. Alwaye 7485 6.14
9. Alleppey 3847 4.34
10. Kayamkulam 2646 2.70
11. Chadayamangalam 3258 3.73
12. Kunnathur (SC) 7231 6.52
13. Karunagapally 8314 8.51
14. Eravipuram 3012 2.62
15. Chathanoor 2447 2.33
16. Vamanapuram 5758 5.70
17. Ariyanad 2381 2.61
18. Kazhakuttam 4479 4.27
19. Trivandrum West 4614 5.52
Source : Election Commission, 1996, op. cit., pp.156-89.
margin of 8618 votes). Constituency-wise trend shows that its votes ranged from 75
to 8,314 with an average of 2,045. There were 19 constituencies in which PDP
polled above 2000 votes and in constituencies like Karunagappally (8,314), Alwaye
(7,485), Kunnathur (7,231) and Mattancherry (5,238) this was above 5000. Among
124
them, Karunagappally and Kunnathur (SC) are very close to the native place of
Mau’dani. PDP succeeded in giving a shock to the League in Mattancherry where
the LDF candidate (M.A.Thomas) defeated the party’s (League’s) nominee,
T.A.Ahamed Kabeer, by a nominal margin of 425, while the PDP got 5,238 votes.
Table 4.8
Performance of PDP : 2011 Assembly Election
Constituency Votes District District
total
1. Vallikkunnu 2666
(2.63)
Malappuram 11776
(2.57)
2. Tirurangadi 4281
(4.27)
3. Tirur 1802
(1.42)
4. Kottakkal 3027
(2.56)
5. Thrithala 590
(0.48) Palakkad
1308
(0.54) 6. Pattambi
718
(0.61)
7. Perumbavoor 1094
(0.87) Ernakulam
1094
(0.87)
8. Kunnathur (SC) 1354
(0.94) Kollam
4588
(1.58) 9. Eravipuram
3234
(3.10)
Total votes18766 (0.11 per cent)
Note : According to the Official Report of the Election Commission, PDP contested only in
seven seats and it got 14,178 votes ( 0.08 %). This was because Kunnathur and
Eravipuram seats were not included in PDP account.
Source : Election Commission 2011, op. cit., p. 46.
Performance of PDP in this election was very poor. It got an aggregate of
18,766 votes (0.11 per cent of the state total) and 1.76 per cent of the votes polled in
the constituencies in which it contested. The highest polling in favour of the party
125
was registered in Eravipuram Constituency in Kollam district where its candidate
Mylakkad Shah, a close camp follower of Abdul Nazar Mau’dani, got 3,234 (03.10
per cent) out of 1,0,4083 votes polled. The party candidate in Kunnathur
constituency, situated in the native place of Mau’dani, got only 1,354 (0.95 per
cent) votes out of a total of 1,42,990. In Malappuram district, in Kottackal
constituency, the party candidate polled the highest with 3,027 (02.56 per cent)
votes [Government of Kerala, 2011: 7].
Thus the electoral data show that, like INL, PDP’s dream of emerging as an
alternative to the Muslim League has proved futile. It is nowhere near even putting
up a strong challenge to the League. One prominent reason for this is the bipolar
nature of state politics where a party has to identity itself with either of the two
fronts – LDF and UDF – or face political oblivion. Further PDP has never tasted
power and it did not have control over the vast political patronage which power
gives. In both counts, Muslim League stands above PDP and there is no
comparison between the two either in terms of support of the Muslim community
or in the matter of helping the community to achieve progress in various fields.
1.4. Other Non-League Political Outfits
There are a few other political outfits who are desirous of obtaining a
political space among the Muslims of Kerala. Of theses, mention should be made
of National Democratic Front (NDF)/ Popular Front of India (PFI)/ Social
Democratic Party of India (SDPI). Compared to the Indian Union Muslim
League, it is a mere splinter group/party with hardly any clear-cut socio-political
programme or a mass base. It does not have the recognition of the Election
Commission of India as it has not shown its electoral presence in a meaningful
sense.
Actually this party, which bears different titles - NDF, PFI and SDPI - is
different manifestations of the same political force. For instance, NDF4 was formed
in 1993. Later in 2006, it merged with the Karnataka Forum for Dignity and
Manitha Neethi Pasarai of Tamilnadu to form the Popular Front of India [PFI,
2011]. Again in 2009, PFI together with like-minded organizations, viz.,
126
Association for Social Justice (Andhra Pradesh), Citizens’ Forum (Goa), Social
and Educational Forum (Rajastan), Nagarik Adhikar Suraksha Samiti (West Bengal)
and Lillong Social Forum (Manipur) decided to form a strong political party at the
national level [Times of India, 2009]. The Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI)
was the product of this ambitious plan. The SDPI published its manifesto on
October 18, 2009 at its first National Delegates Meet with the slogan “Freedom
from Hunger, Freedom from Fear” and since then it has been demanding balanced
representation of all social groups in legislatures and all administrative bodies
nominated by the government in proportion to their population [Bari, 2009].
Article 3 of the Party Constitution declares its aims and objectives as the fulfillment
of a socio-political system emphasizing Justice, Freedom, Equality and Fraternity,
and to bring all the deprived sections under the roof of a national political
organization. Further, it aims at upholding a political ideology promoting dignity
and safety of marginalized sections, and to empower the communities which are
backward and in a minority in India [SDPI, 2009: 1]. It means that it mainly
focuses on the political empowerment of the downtrodden and marginalized
sections belonging to all religions and sections of the Indian society.
Briefing the circumstances which led to the formation of NDF and later of
the SDPI, Nazaruddin Elamarum says, ‘since independence, the Muslims and
other downtrodden sections have remained marginalized and the mainstream
political parties have utilized them only as their vote-banks without addressing the
basic issues they confront or having any concrete programmes for their upliftment’
[Elamarum, 2011]. It has since then been trying to rope in disgruntled Muslim
youths who felt that the Indian Union Muslim League had not done anything
concrete for the Muslim cause [The New Indian Express, 2009]. It highlights the
inefficiency of the Muslim League on the one side and the ‘weaknesses’ of the
secular parties, like Communists and the Congress on the other, in solving
problems that the community confronts [Radhakrishnan, op.cit., 270]. Here it is
worth noting that the real target of the SDPI was the disgruntled and unemployed
youth who began feeling insecure when the Sangh Parivar elements started
harassing the Muslims in different parts of the country on different issues.
Demolition of Babri Masjid and communal riots in Kerala and in various places in
127
India offered added reasons for the sustenance of a party like SDPI. Further, the
perceived ‘failure’ of the Muslim League to measure up to outfits like RSS has been
widely propagated among the youth to rally them under its banner [Kurup and
Ismail, 2008 : 233].
Interestingly, even global issues like American imperialism and its
occupation of the Muslim countries for its own vested interests were used (and are
being used) to aggravate Muslims’ feeling of insecurity. The SDPI and its earlier
versions used (still use) an explosive mix of Pan-Islamism5, Muslim League’s
failure on various counts and the alleged insecurity of the community nationally as
the raison d’être for their existence. These outfits which consider RSS as their main
adversary play the twin role, of a protagonist of Islamic extremism and the
mouthpiece of Islamic revivalism [Kurup and Ismail, op.cit., 357-358]. Whatever
may be the aims and objectives of the party, it needs to be noted that the latter
avatars like PFI and SDPI are suspected of extremist activities. The organization
has been categorized as a militant group which was under the scrutiny of the
Union Home Ministry in 2006 for fanning fanaticism along with some other hard-
line groups.
In the beginning, the NDF was not interested in participating in electoral
politics as it then thought it prudent first to consolidate itself organizationally
before taking a plunge into the electoral arena. And only after its change of identity
into SDPI that the party began to participate in elections very seriously and, that
too, on the basis of its conviction that empowering the Muslims politically was the
only answer to many of the problems faced by the community in the country [The
New Indian Express, 2009]. The first ever election it contested was the by-election
to the Kannur Assembly seat in November 2009. In the election, its candidate, P
Abdul Majeed Faisy, General Secretary of the party, could get only 3,500 votes.
But in the civic elections of 2010, it opened its account in some of the Grama
Panchayats, in one Block Panchayat and in a couple of Municipalities, though its
performance was not very convincing. The following Table shows the wards where
the SDPI could prove its strength.
128
It is seen that SDPI has won one seat each in Kannur, Thodupuzha and
Pathanamthitta Municipalities without any support from others and one
Independent candidate is elected to the Palakkad Municipality with its support. In
Grama Panchayats, it has won four seats without any support and two
independents were elected from two wards and in one seat (Kunnikkara) its
candidate polled the same number of votes its Muslim League opponent got. In the
Table 4.9
Wards where SDPI Proved its Strength : Civic Elections 2010
No. Ward Name of LSGI District Category
1 Kasanakotta South Kannur
Municipality Kannur Female
2 Keerikode Thodupuzha
Municipality Idukki Female
3 Kulashekharapathi Pathanamthitta
Municipality Pathanamthitta Female
4 Municipal Office Shornor
Municipality Palakkad Female
5 Mathakkal Erattupetta Grama
Panchayat Kottayam SC
6 Pazhunnan Chowannur Grama
Panchayat Thrissur Female
7 Machampady Manjeswaram
Grama Panchayat Kasargode Female
8 Mayyathumkara Poruvazhi
GramaPanchayat Kollam Female
9 Mannadisseri Kulashekharapuram
Grama Panchayat Kollam General
10 Areekulam Vengara Grama
Panchayat Malappuram Female
11 Kunnikkara Kadungallur Grama
Panchayat Ernakulam Female
12 Vanchinadu Vazhakkulam Block
Panchayat Ernakulam General
Source : Chief Electoral Officer, Kerala, ceokerala.gov.in
Block Panchayat, it has won one seat. This victory is very notable as its candidate,
Prof. Anas, contested the election while in detention as an accused in having given
129
protection to those who attacked Prof. Joseph6. He has won from Vanchinadu
division in Vazhakkulam Block in Ernakulam district by a margin of 1,903 votes.
He bagged 3,992 votes while the UDF’s M.A. Muhammed (Congress (I)) got 2,089
and LDF’s Muhammed Kunju Sulaiman (Cong-S) got only 1,666 votes
[twocirlces.net, 2010].
An analysis of the election result also brings to the fore a strange fact that
SDPI has succeeded mostly in constituencies reserved for women. Also among the
elected was one candidate who was a Non-Muslim. Another interesting thing is
that the party could not disturb in any manner the vote banks of the Muslim
League in the Malappuram district. Its achievement in the district was confined to
the election of an independent candidate in the Vengara Grama Panchayat.
However, the first Assembly election contested by the party was that of
2011. It fielded 82 candidates in the election and bagged a total of 1,61,096 votes,
which was 0.92 per cent of the total polled votes in the state. And this formed 1.60
per cent of the votes polled in the 82 constituencies it had contested
[ceokerala.gov.in, 2011]. In the Malappuram district, the party fielded candidates
in all the 16 constituencies and polled 44,415 votes (02.34 per cent). The highest
tally of votes was in Vengara constituency where Abdul Majeed Faisy, State
General Secretary, gained 04.71 per cent (4,683) votes. Among other districts, in
Kozhikode it got 14265 votes (0.99 per cent); in Kannur 16,046 votes (1.84 per
cent); in Ernakulam 17,338 (1.82 per cent); in Idukki 7,154 (2.03 per cent) and in
Kollam 12,923 votes (2.49 per cent). There were three constituencies - Azhikode,
Manalur and Vadakara- where SDPI polled votes higher than the margin of votes
obtained by LDF/UDF.
The aforesaid analysis shows that Non-League political formations have
little political clout among the Muslim masses of Kerala. Many of these formations
were formed at various periods either as products of the power struggle within the
Muslim League or due to differences of opinions with it (League) on certain social
and political issues. Among the latter, one major issue over which one of the
longest and more thorough going discussions that took place was on the question
relating to League’s relationship with the Indian National Congress in Kerala.
130
Table 4.10
District-wise Performance of SDPI : 2011 Assembly Election
Constituency Total Votes Polled Votes polled by SDPI
District
Total
SDPI
Contested
District-wise
In SDPI
contested
Constituencies
Votes
% to the total of
SDPI contested
Constituencies
% to the
District Total
Kasaragod 05 03 653316 381048 4266 01.11 00.65
Kannur 11 07 1390131 867579 16046 01.84 01.15
Wayanad 03 02 394944 249841 3939 01.57 00.99
Kozhikode 13 11 1678277 1438708 14265 00.99 01.42
Malappuram 16 16 1897444 1897444 44415 02.34 02.34
Palakkad 12 07 1468267 879869 14299 01.62 00.97
Thrissur 13 03 1687397 399840 6704 01.67 00.39
Ernakulam 14 08 1711598 948120 17338 01.82 01.01
Idukki 05 03 578543 352402 7154 02.03 01.23
Kottayam 09 02 1052683 225345 4486 01.99 00.42
Alappuzha 09 04 1212527 539565 3813 00.70 00.31
Pathanamthitta 05 03 646958 382978 1985 00.51 00.30
Kollam 11 04 1387240 519802 12923 02.49 00.93
Thiruvananthapuram
14 09 1628326 933873 9463 01.01
00.58
Kerala 140 82 17387651
10016414 161096
01.60 00.93
Source : Election Commission 2011, op. cit., p. 46.
Such debates even bordered on picking up and playing with the age old enmity
between the Congress and the Muslim League of Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s vintage,
though nothing of any serious consequence happened apart from a couple of minor
and inconsequential splits in the parent organization. Also of significance were the
debates on issues like the Muslim Personal Law and the demolition of Babri
Masjid. However, the Non-League political parties were not able to make political
gains on these issues so as to pose any serious challenge to the prominence of the
131
Muslim League. This has created a situation in which one ‘League Goliath’ is
surrounded by many Non-League ‘Lilliputians’ who, by themselves, were/are not
capable enough to address many a social, cultural, economic and political issue
affecting the community. At best they are capable enough to make sounds and
furies signifying nothing. By implication, this means that these organizations are
hardly capable enough to exploit and make beneficial use of situation in which the
identity and political behaviour of the Muslim community are changing in subtle
ways.
2. Non-Political Organisations
Figure 3
Religious Sects among Muslims and their Comparative strength
33%
8%
12%
4% 4%
38%
EK Sunni Faction
A P Sunni Faction
Other Sunni Faction
Mujahid Faction
Jamat-e-Islami
Other Muslims
Source : Wikipedia
Besides political formations, various non-political organizations - social and
educational agencies – are also active among the Muslims of Kerala. These
132
organizations could be distinguished from their political counterparts on the basis
of their involvement or absence of such involvement in things, political. These
organs, therefore, do not harbor any political ambitions. As such they primarily
focus on the social and religious issues festering the community. Sometimes they
act in unison and at other times, they function in isolation in realizing their aims
and objectives. These organizations include religious sects like Kerala Naduvathul
Mujahidin (KNM), Jamat-e-Islami and the two Sunni factions, educational agencies
like MES and MSS and forum for social activism like the Jama’at Federation. All
these contribute, in varying degree, to the well-being of the community.
2.1. Religious Organizations: 1. Kerala Naduvathul Mujahideen
Earlier organizational attempts in Kerala to reform the Muslim community
initiated through the Islam Dharma Paripalana Sanghom of Vakkom Abdul Khader
Moulavi and the Kerala Muslim Aikya Sanghom led by K.M.Moulavi could not
mobilize the community in the desired measure and direction. Also ordinary Islahi
workers had no platform to coordinate their activities in respect of spreading the
universal message of Thouhid.7 The formation of Kerala Naduvathul Mujahid
(KNM), on 20th April 1950, as a popular Islamic Organization, a subsidiary to the
Kerala Jamiyat-ul- Ulama, bringing within its fold all classes of people was basically
aimed at this [Ahamedkutty, 1995 :75]. The organization otherwise called as the
Mujahid Movement of Kerala, is affiliated to the All-India Ahle- Hadith, an
organization with identical aims and objectives [Ibid., 70]. Its membership is
opened to all those who accept and agree with the preaching of the Prophet
Muhammad, in its purity and genuine tradition. It was registered under the
Societies Act in 1957 and K.M. Moulavi and N.V. Abdussalam Moulavi were its
founding President and Secretary, respectively.
The main objective of KNM is to unite the Muslims of Kerala in the light of
Holy Quran and Sunnah (practices of the Last Prophet) and thereby to eradicate
superstitious beliefs and practices that prevailed/prevail among the Muslims
[angelfire.com, 2010]. Following the measures initiated by earlier reformists, it has
tried to reform the community through promoting religious and secular education.
133
Further, the organization also attempts to spread the true injections of Islam on the
individual and social life, to promote welfare of the members of the community
and establish harmonious relationship and cordiality with co-religionists
[Muhammed, S. 1960: 154].
Also KNM’s opposition towards terrorism, communalism and extremism of
all kinds which disturb the social order is uncompromising [Salafi, 2010]. From the
start, Islahi scholars began to make the people aware of the need for education and
persuade them to attain it. For this, it had formed a Board of Education in 1957,
with Amani Moulavi as the first Chairman and since then the Board has been
doing everything to give training to teachers so that they could acquire modern
methods and techniques of teaching. For the first time, the Quran was translated
into Malayalam, the native language of Kerala, and Arabic Colleges and High
Schools were started in different parts of the State, thus offering, simultaneously,
opportunity for both religious education and modern education to the younger
generation. Arabic Colleges and Arabic Oriental High Schools in villages like
Areacode, Pulikkal, Edathanattukara, Thirurangadi, Edavanna and Feroke
became learning centers for Kerala Muslims in modern and religious education
[angelfire.com, 2010]. The KNM publishes a number of Journals such as Al Manar,
Vichinthanam, Shabab and Pudava. The publishing wing called Yuvatha Book
House, started in 1986, under the KNM publishes Islamic books on various aspects
[Azharali, 2008: 333].
Further, it effectively works for the cause of women education. For its
promotion, it encourages the establishment of institutions where Muslim girls can
attend keeping their religious identity. Thus, in a sense, the organ helps the
community to break the barriers created by the orthodox Ulema in the matter of
women education. Contemporaneously, the Muslim girls have no hesitation in
going for modern education including higher education and professional education
[Ahamedkutty, op. cit., 218]. Also, it inspires Muslim women to attain awareness
about their rights and duties and in order to mobilise them, an exclusive women’s
wing was established by it. At first the girls were organised behind the banner of
‘MSM Girls Wing’, subsequently, the Muslim Girls Movement (MGM), was set-
134
up, in 1987, so as to enable active participation in public issues and ensure
coordination among women and girl students. The MGM upholds dignity and
rights of women and responds to any kind of atrocities against womanhood. Its
identity could be differentiated from modern feminist organizations in terms of
both its objectives and issues undertaken by it [angelfire.com, 2010]. While the
Feminist Movement usually takes a progressive stand which is secular in nature on
women issues, the KNM and its auxiliary wings look at them through the
kaleidoscope of Islamic morality, tradition and ethics. It was this reason which
encouraged the organ to adopt a stand against the Supreme Court Judgment in
Shabanu Case.
This, however, need not mean that the outlook of KNM is always regressive
in nature on such issues. For instance, it supports and argues for the entry of
women in Mosque for prayer, campaigns against dowry and criticizes deviations in
morality and values. The working of the Board of Islamic Service and Missionary
Information (BISMI), a wing of KNM, is also worth noting here. It has been
established to fight the evil practices associated with marriage and family life. The
practice of dowry is a case in point as it has reached such a level that marriage
became almost impossible for poor girls, and in other cases married life proved
horrendous. BISMI has been actively campaigning in the society against this anti-
social and anti-Islamic practice along with issues like extravaganza including the
demand for gold and use of ornaments. It frequently organizes ideal Islamic
marriage congregations in which a number of couples enter into wedlock at
the same venue. Conducted strictly in accordance with Islamic principles and
practices, these marriages are noted for their modesty and low levels of expenses.
The Islahi movement in Kerala does not harbour any political ambition
though it has always taken a bold stand against communalism and extremism.
This, however, does not mean that its members do not have any political affinity.
In fact, there are members who are active in different political parties and also hold
diverse views on non-religious matters with the organization giving them a free
hand in such matters [junction kerala.com : 2010]. A.P.Abdul Khader Moulavi,
General Secretary of the organ, neatly summarises this: ‘The KNM has no affinity
135
or affiliation to any political party. Its activists might have their own views about
and relations with political parties. The organization has not issued any circular or
plea to vote for any party and never has a permanent relation with any one of
them, except exemplary co-operation in general matters upholding its basic
principles. It has never bargained or influenced any political party hoping to get
any official favour’ [Moulavi.A, 2010]. It is also interesting to note that during the
formative years the top office bearers of the Movement were allowed to take up
offices in political parties only after resigning their position in the Movement. A
typical example in this regard was that of N.V.Abdul Salam Moulavi who was
allowed to become active in the Muslim League only after resigning the
Presidentship of the Movement [Azharali, op. cit., 333].
This naturally means that there are, within the Mujahid Movement, leaders
belonging to various political hues and shades. For instance, its earlier leaders
Muhammed Abdurahman Sahib, E.Moidu Moulavi, K.M.Moulavi, Kattisseri
Muhammed Kutty Musliar and Seethi Sahib were well-known Congressmen.
K.C.Abubaker Moulavi, A.V.Abdurahman Haji, Mankada Abdul Aziz Moulavi
were at the helm of League Politics8 [Ahamedkutty, op. cit., 218]. However, in the
earlier days of the Muslim League, Islahi scholars have played significant role in
bringing the Muslims to the fold of that party. K.M.Seethi Sahib was an
unquestioned leader of All India Muslim League and at the same time that of
Kerala Islahi movement. So, majority of the Mujahid activists remain as
sympthisers or workers of the League [Azharali, op. cit., 340]. Some prominent
leaders in the Muslim League, today, like K.P.A.Majeed, K.M.Shaji, et. al. also
appear in Mujahid platforms as its spokesmen, in addition to a host of others.
On hindsight, it becomes clear that KNM has been playing a yeoman
service towards the cause of social change and modernity among the Muslims of
Kerala. It is true that it has to face stiff opposition in this regard from the orthodox
Sunni faction, in earlier days. These groups even allege that KNM is spreading
false beliefs and practices which, by and large, are un-Islamic. However, the
movement is not deterred by such false propaganda and it, in fact, counters them
by exposing the real intentions of the opponents viz., that of keeping the masses
136
captives of orthodox Ulama [Salafi, 2010]. Though the split9 of 2002 in the KNM
has dampened its activities temporarily, it has recouped from it very fast and,
today, it is the prime torch-bearer of the new socio-cultural and religious
awakening among the Muslims of Kerala.
2.1. 2. Jamat-e-Islami
Jamat-e-Islami, formed in 1941, in Lahore, by Maulana Sayyid Abulala
Mau’dudi (1903-1979) is another organization which caters itself to the social
redemption of the Muslim community. It has adopted the Qur’an as a basic
document to justify the formation of the organization and its programmes. It has its
own means for religiously reforming the community as well as to fulfill its political
objectives. A number of Muslims, including both madrassa-trained Ulamas as well as
others, who had received a modicum of modern education, were attracted to the
Jam’at in its early years [Sikand, 2009]. Ideologically, the organization does not
separate the state from religion, ie., the temporal from the spiritual. Instead, it
expresses its in-built political nature by defining religion itself as the state.
Religiously, the Jama’at sticks to the traditional Islamic path uncompromisingly
[Panicker, op.cit., 125-26]. The ideological stand and the socio-religious outlook of
this organization will become clear if one analyses the positions taken by its
founder Maulana Maududi on important issues of relevance to the Muslims of this
part of the world. For instance, he argued that the Muslims need not rigidly follow
any of the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence10 though he looked forward to the
eventual establishment of the supremacy of Shariat laws (iqamat-i-din) in the
country [Khalidi, 1996: 5]. This, he believed, was essential for the enjoyment of
real freedom [Hameed, 2004: 502]. In addition, he presented the idea of Islamic
modernization instead of colonial modernization [Mandalamkunnu, 2007: 135].
He, therefore, saw the Jama’at as spearheading the struggle for the establishment of
an Islamic state, strictly ruled in accordance with the Shari’ah.
In Kerala, the official formation of Jamat-e-Islami (JIK) was in 1948 at
Valancherry. It was formed at the initiative of V.P.Muhammed Ali Moulavi11 who
was a disciple of Mau’dudi [Hameed, op. cit., 502]. It is another thing that even
137
prior to the official formation of Jamat-e-Islami, Maudidi’s ideology began to spread
among the religious scholars of Kerala largely through his articles carried by
‘Tharjumanul Qur’an’ published from Hyderabad, and the monthly ‘Al Murshid’,
edited by K.M.Moulavi, which had wide circulation in the state since 1935.
It is a well-organized cadre organization with a wide range of publications,
educational institutions, and trained activists and has been much more effective in
Kerala than in the North. It has been concentrating its attention on educational
and literary activities and has been playing a significant role in bringing about
social and religious awareness among the Muslims [Ahamedkutty, 1997: 17]. The
Jama‘at has its own role in the socio-religious renaissance of Kerala and, like the
Mujahid Movement, also allows women to pray in the Mosque.
The organization has numerous agencies and institutions to chart out and
implement its established objectives and programmes. While the Majilisath-ah-
lameen Islami12 manages 40 high schools owned by the Jama’at, the Islamic
Publishing House (IPH) takes care of a wide range of publications including
Prabhodhanam Weekly, Bodhanam Monthly, Malarvadi (for children), in addition to
the Madhyamam Daily and Weekly. Interestingly, Madhyamam Newspaper is now
the third most widely read newspaper in Kerala [Sikand, svabhinava.org].
The Jamat-e-Islami also has a large number of feeder organizations to
manage its religious and social services. For instance, it has a girls’ wing, known as
Girls Islamic Organization (GIO) which organizes women and campaigns on a
wide range of issues affecting them; an Islamic Students’ Organization (ISO) called
the Students Islamic Organization (SIO),13 formed in 1982 [Cheriyamundam,
2004: 514]; and a Youth wing, the Solidarity Youth Movement formed on 13th
May 2003. The Solidarity Youth Movement carries out many humanitarian and
social service activities and is involved in many struggles and agitations on issues
affecting public interests including the agitation against the Coca-Cola factory at
Plachimada (Palakkad district), the proposed Express Highway, the Build-
Operate-Transfer (BOT) system of road development, the use of Endosulfan and
Chengara agitation of the Tribals for land, to mention a few [wapedia.mobi, 2010].
138
Though the organization is inherently non-political in nature, at times it
used to harbor political ambitions and mainstream political parties also used to
court it, particularly during elections. For example, it fielded its own candidates in
certain Muslim pockets in the civic elections of 2010, of course without much luck.
On the flip side, it was seen offering support basically to the Left Democratic Front
candidates and in rare cases also to the candidates fielded by the United
Democratic Front. Occasionally this has even created dissensions within the
organization. While the involvement of the organization in politics could be
viewed against its larger intentions to modernize the community, adoption of
Qur’an as the fundamental doctrine and defining ‘religion (Din) itself as state’ has
tempted others to suspect the organization on the charge of perpetuation of
religious fundamentalism. According to the protagonists of the organization,
however, this is a gross misunderstanding and misinterpretation of its ideals and
objectives. This section points out its tolerance of religio-cultural plurality to justify
their argument [Rahman, 2011].
2.1.3. Sunni Factions
The Sunnis, who claim to be the real Ahle-Sunnah-wal-Jama’at, have been
popularly known as Samastha since the ideological split among the Muslim
religious scholars in Kerala during the first quarter of the 20th century [Samad,
1998; Ahmedkutty, 1997; Engineer, 1995, 2006; Irivetti, 2002; Kurup and Ismail,
2008]. Since Samastha is a body of renowned and venerated religious scholars, it
has got commendable hold over the Muslim community and even made religious
pronouncements particularly targeting the Mujahids (Wahabis) [Kurup and Ismail,
2008: 283]. As the majority of Muslims of Kerala follow the religious practices
based on the Shafi and Hanafi Schools, the Sunnis have a broad base here.
The Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulama (SKJU), in course of time, established
numerous auxiliary units under its aegis. For instance, the 19th conference held in
March 1951 at Badagara formed the Samastha Kerala Islamic Educational Board or
Samastha Kerala Islam Matha Vidhyabhyasa Board (SKIMVB), as the first auxiliary
organization; the 20th conference held in April, 1954 witnessed the formation of a
139
youth wing known as Sunni Yuvajan Sangham (SYS); the Samastha Kerala Sunni
Mahallu Federation (SKSMF) was formed in 1976 (April 26); and in 1989 (February,
19) the Samastha Kerala Sunni Students Federation (SKSSF)14 was formed.
Meanwhile in 1989, the organization witnessed a serious split, more on personal
grounds rather than because of any ideological differences, when a faction led by
A.P.Abubakker Musliar broke away from the parent organization and formed a
separate body. Since then, the parent organization has been called E.K. Sunni -
named after E.K. Aboobacker Musliar, the former leader of the Samastha Kerala
Jamiyyathul Ulama – and the break-away section Kandapuram Sunni named after
Kanthapuram A.P.Aboobacker Musliar, who is now the General Secretary of the
All-India Jamiyyathul Ulama [wiki/E._K._Sunni, and wiki/A._P._Sunni : 2010].
Ordinary people are often confused as both factions prefix the word Samastha along
with their organizations and feeder movements. It is also interesting to note that
there are no serious differences between the two of them on issues confronting the
community. For instance, in the matter of religious orthodoxy, both groups do not
hold any basic difference and both believe that praying at the shrine is both
permissible and helpful since, according to them, the saints do possess special
powers and grace [Banu, 2006: 325]. In organizing campaigns against reformists
like the Mujahids and the Jamat-e-Islami, the Kandapuram faction is very advanced
than the other. Towards the appearance of women in public and their entry in
Masjids for prayer, the two groups firmly go by the traditional attitude.
Both groups also have many prestigious institutions and establishments.
The upcoming Darsana TV belongs to Sunni EK Faction, the first faction to
introduce a television channel. Satyadhara and Sunni Afkar magazines are the
mouthpieces of their youth and students' wings, respectively. The Group also own
many centres of higher learning of Islamic theology in Kerala. These include
Jamiah Nooriyyah Arabic College at Pattikkad and Darul Huda Islamic Academy at
Chemmad, both in Malappuram district, besides the Co-ordination of Islamic
Colleges (CIC, consisting more than 25 Islamic Colleges) and Markazul-Sakafat-al
Sunniah (Sunni Cultural Centre) at Karanthur near Kozhikode15 [wikipedia.org/
A.P.Sunni : 2010].
140
When the community in Kerala began to feel the need and necessity for
modernization, the Sunnis came to its support. As a result, they began to
administer steps to bring social change among the Muslims through modern
education and socio-cultural activities. Now, the establishments managed by the
Sunni factions are well equipped with sufficient facilities for promoting modern
education and social development of the community. Even when strongly arguing
for limited role of women in public life, Sunni Factions do not restrict women in
getting secular education. As the Sunnis get strong support from the community,
their initiatives for social change have become more significant.
2.2.1. Socio-Educational Agencies: Muslim Educational Society
The Muslim Educational Society (M.E.S) is a non-political social service
organization, established in 1964, at Kozhikode. The real force behind it was a
group of socially committed persons led by Dr.P.K.Abdul Ghafoor who continued
as its President until his death. C.P.Kunjahammed, K.M.Bahauddin,
Dr.Mrs.Kamarunnisa Khalid, Dr.K.Muhammed Kutty, Dr.M.M.Abdulla,
K.C.Hassankutty, Adv.A.V.Muhammed, P.A.Khader Meeran, S.K.Khader,
T.Abdul Azeez, V.Abdul Rahman, K.V.Kunjahammed Koya, P.K.Ali,
Dr.T.P.Muhammed, K.C.Ahammed, and M.A.Shukkur were the other founding
members [meskerala.com, 2010]. It was supported by a large number of
professionals and businessmen. As the society had no political links, people from
all walks of life and background joined its fold and very soon it became a major
platform for all sections of Muslims to take up social welfare activities and to start
educational institutions. It is the leading educational agency among the Muslims in
India. The cardinal principle of the organization is its belief that the development
of the individual leads to the development of community which finally helps the
nation building process. Towards achieving its ends, the organization still keeps a
distance from party politics and the sectarian religious philosophy though it does
not ban members from taking part in politics or religious organizations. It also
gives great emphasis to religious education in its institutions. Women's education is
another main theme of the organization. It emphasizes democratic values that are
inherent to Islam and believes in the principle of collective responsibility in running
141
the organization. The MES adheres to the concept of social justice and is in the
forefront of the fight to achieve this [meskerala.com, 2010].
Organizationally, it functions under the Societies Act and membership is
opened to any persons who have attained the age of 21 years and who subscribe to
its aims and objectives and agree to abide by the provisions of the rules and
regulations of the society. Presently, its membership is estimated to be 10,386
including about 100 women [Ramanadhan, 2010]. In a short span of time, its units
have spread to all Districts, Taluks and Panchayats in Kerala, other parts of India
and even abroad. The main objective of the MES is educational, social and
cultural up-lift of the Indian Muslims. According to the Rules and Regulations of
the MES (Amended in 2011), ‘it shall strive to promote higher and technical
education and improve the standard and quality of education among the people in
general and minorities and backward classes in particular by granting scholarships,
loans, grants and other forms of aid to poor and deserving students and
institutions’ [MES, 2012]. A secular organization with a firm belief in the Indian
polity, it views that reservation is essential for the advancement of the
downtrodden and backward classes.
The MES, in principle and practice, focuses on establishing and maintaining
educational institutions with a view to uplift the community, supposedly the most
backward in education. As most of these institutions are located in Muslim
concentrated areas and since such institutions ensure prescribed reservation to the
community members, the endeavour has resulted in a remarkable transformation
of the educational status of Muslims of Kerala. At the inception of the MES, the
Muslims had only three colleges and very few schools. Compared to this, today it
alone is running more than 150 educational institutions in India and abroad
including a Medical College, Engineering Colleges, Nursing Colleges, Dental
Colleges, Arts and Science Colleges, aided Higher Secondary Schools, CBSE
Schools, Job-oriented institutions, Orphanages, School for mentally handicapped
and Old Age Homes. Table 4.11 shows the Educational reach of the organ.
142
It is stated that at least 10 lakh Muslims in Kerala have been directly or
indirectly benefited by the educational activities of the MES [MES, 2012]. The
organ also plays vital role to enhance the educational status of Muslim women. At
the time of emergence of the MES, presence of women in the field of education
Table 4.11
Major Educational Institutions Run by MES in Kerala
Category Total Institutions located in
Malabar
Primary Schools 23 06 (26%)
Aided Higher Secondary Schools 06 04 (75%)
Un-Aided Higher Secondary Schools 02 01 (50%)
Un-Aided High Schools 04 02(50%)
CBSC and ICSE Schools 37 27 (73%)
Special Schools for Mentally Retards 02 Nil
ITC and Computer Centres 07 04 (57%)
Teachers Training Centre (TTC) 01 01
Aided Arts and Science Colleges 07 04 (57%)
Un-Aided Arts and Science Colleges 07 03 (43%)
Women’s Colleges 09 08 (89%)
Professional Colleges 08 06 (75%)
Training Colleges 02 01 (50%)
Total 115 67 (58.26%)
Note : Figures given in brackets indicate percentage distribution.
Source : Muslim Educational Society (2012), ‘List of Major Institutions Run by MES’,
Office Details, Kozhikode, pp. 1-5.
was hardly one per cent, but it has risen to a significant level now [Ibid]. Out of a
total of 23 Arts and Science Colleges, nine are Women’s Colleges exclusively for
imparting even postgraduate education to the fair sex. The Society has also
introduced numerous social welfare programmes notable among which are
charitable activities, work for the welfare of women and children, maintaining old
age homes and boarding houses for physically and mentally handicapped,
143
providing interest free loans, grants and subsidies to small businessmen and
hereditary craftsmen, and scholarships and awards for academic brilliance. Besides
this, it has established an Information Guidance and Employment Bureau to help
find jobs for the unemployed [MES, 2011: 6-7].
2.2.2. Muslim Service Society
In order to mould a society with Islamic awareness, modern outlook and
economic stability, the Muslim Service Society (MSS) was formed in 1980 (on 27th
May) at Kozhikkode. It was organized by P.M.Muhammed Koya, M. Abdulrahman,
K.U.Koya Hassan Haji and C.P.Hashim. Since its inception, many eminent
personalities from different walks of life have been associating with the activities of
the organization. It is a platform for all those who are interested in social work,
irrespective of class and age group. The organization is conceived as a selfless and
service-minded social organization functioning with a wide and organized
network. It keeps itself above all divisive tendencies, whether based on political or
religious grounds. Presently, it has about 6,422 members throughout Kerala
[Kareem, 2010]. The organization has a Ladies Wing and a Youth Wing too and it
focuses on the uplift of the community in general and the poor in particular. The
multifarious activities of it extend to awareness programmes against social evils,
establishment of educational institutions, religious preaching and charitable
activities. Currently the MSS administers 26 institutions in Kerala and two in
Tamil Nadu. Among them are seven Medical related centres, five Schools, two
Colleges, one Career Institute and remaining are Hostels and Shopping
Complexes’ [MSS, 2008: 40].
2.2.3. Jama’at Federation
Almost all religious organizations in Kerala concentrate their attention in
the northern part of the State and the Dakshina Kerala Jamiath-ul-Ulama, a forum of
religious scholars formed in 1955, was the only exception. Since the formation, it
has been working uninterruptedly in Kerala society with malice towards none. The
vacuum of a religious mass-organization in the South was filled, when the Dakshina
(Southern) Kerala Jama’at Federation, popularly known as Jama’at Federation, was
144
formed in 1981. The present Kerala Jama’at Federation is the new incarnation of it.
Thenceforth, the Federation has been considered as the apex body of Mahal
Jama’ats in southern districts. There are about 3,000 such units in Southern Kerala.
Structurally, it is a consortium of religious scholars and leaders of the community.
The Imam (religious scholar who administers religious affairs) and the president
and secretary of the local Jama’ats are communication link between the Jama’at
Federation and Mahal Jama’ats. They can easily and effectively, without much
expense and time, communicate the messages of the organization to the members
of the community at the ‘Friday gathering’. The organization co-operates with
other Muslim organizations in general on issues affecting the community. It has no
affiliation with any religious organizations or groups. But it follows the Sunni
traditions without expressing solidarity to the Sunni groups named after either E.K
or A.P factions. Also it has no special concern for or against any political party. It
keeps friendly relationship with all political parties, but without ignoring the
interest of the community [Muhammed, 2010].
All the aforesaid organizations have contributed much to the progress of the
Muslim community of Kerala. Among the political organizations, the Non-
Leaguers, at different times, have succeeded in bringing the lapses of the League to
the attention of the public. It is true that their attempts to address the issues faced
by the community did not succeed in most of the cases. Nevertheless, such
organizations could generate a feeling that the Muslim League is not sufficient
enough to protect the interest of the community. Also the efforts of these
formations in democratising the ‘public sphere’ within the Muslim community
through vigorous debates and discussions on issues of contemporary relevance
need to be appreciated. In order to understand the significance of their
contributions in this regard one has to look at the nature of that ‘public’ sphere in
earlier times. Needless to say, it had been a sphere which was highly religious in
nature with religious leaders calling the shots. It was dipped in conservatism,
traditionalism and orthodoxy. Even discussions and debates were conspicuous by
their absence. In such a social milieu, these political organizations, definitely
inclusive of the Indian Union Muslim League, brought to the fore issues about
145
state craft, governance, secularism, public employment, reservation, education,
social change, constitutional rights and democracy. In a population which felt
isolated, rudderless and fearful of the dominant Hindu community following the
partition of the country, these political formations spoke in a language which has
been reassuring to the ordinary men and women and they also mobilized the
people to the mainstream politics of the State. The general socio-political ambience
of the State has also been conducive to this as the social renaissance movements in
the early twentieth century and the Communist Movement that followed it helped
in democratizing the Kerala Society, unlike many other states in India [Azeez,
op.cit.; Dale, op.cit.; Gopakumar, 1986; Kurup and Ismail, op.cit.; Menon,
1979,1997, 2007; Moulavi, 2002; Nair, 1978; Nair and Menon, 2007;
Namboodirippad, 1984; Nossiter, 1982; Thomas, 1985; and Vilanilam, et.al,
2012].
Thus while the Political organizations have tried their level best to make
politics inclusive through political bargaining and various other strategies, non-
political organizations have done their best in different ways for religious and
educational uplift of the community. The latter’s efforts to serve the community
have been focused more on making people aware of the need for modern
education, abandoning outmoded religious and social practices and administering
institutions to achieve these objectives. All these together have gone a long way in
transforming the attitude of the community towards their existential realities.
Whether it is education or participation in modern occupation, or making best use
of opportunities for geographical mobility (migration to West Asian countries and
even to the countries of the West, including United States of America, for example)
or participation in mainstream social and political issues there was and is a
meaningful change in the outlook of the Kerala Muslims compared to their
counterparts elsewhere in the country and even in many of the Islamic nations.
This change, in a sense, is also inter-generational, ie., there is a perceptible shift in
attitude on all these issues between the older and younger generations. All theses
have helped in creating a great flux in the community which has positive
consequences for the modernization and even democratization of the community.
146
3. Notes
1. Shabanu was a 62-year-old Muslim woman and mother of five children from
Indore, Madhya Pradesh. She was divorced by her husband in 1978 and was
subsequently denied alimony. According to Muslim Personal Law, Shari’at, a
legally separated woman has no claim to get alimony. However, Section 125 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure is applicable to everyone regardless of caste, creed, or
religion. On this ground, she approached the Court for securing maintenance from
her husband, arguing that she had no means to support herself and her children.
The Supreme Court invoked the above Section and ruled that Shabano be given
maintenance money, similar to alimony, [1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCC (2) 556].
2. The Babri Masjid was a mosque in Ayodhya, a city in the Faizabad district of
Uttar Pradesh. The city of Ayodhya is regarded by Hindus to be the birthplace of
the God Rama and is regarded as one of India's most sacred and religious sites.
The mosque was built by Babur, the first Mughal emperor of India, in 1528, and
was named after him [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babri_Mosque]. According to
the Hindu account, it was built after destroying a pre-existing temple of Rama at
the site. At the same time, the Muslims claim that there is no historical record
indicating any destruction, or even the existence of a Hindu Temple at the site
when the Masjid was erected [http://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Babri_Mosque].
[Carnegy, 1870; Narain, 1993: 8-9; Van der Veer, en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/
Demolition_of_Babri_Masjid].
3. The LDF government had given INL the Chairmanship of Forest Industrial
Corporation and Direct Board Membership in Oushadhi.
4. In 1980s and 1990s, whenever the most sensitive issues like Shariat controversy and
demotion of the Babri Masjid had taken place, a section of Muslims felt threatened
by the fundamentalist forces belonging to the Hindu community. The Muslim
League could not take a bold stand on such issues satisfying this section, especially
the youth. It was this background that led to the formation of the National
Democratic Front [Elamarum, 2011].
5. Pan-Islamism is a political movement advocating the unity of Muslims under one
Islamic state, or an international organization with Islamic principles. It is often
like a Caliphate because it aims for a strong and uncorrupted united state of the
world under the Muslims, similar to the period of Muhammed, the Prophet and
the early Caliphate. In this sense, it is Muslim universalism. Historically, Pan-
Islamic movement can be divided into three periods. The first period stretches from
the death of the Prophet to the 18th century. The second, from the 18th century to
1924, when the Turkish National Assembly dismissed Khalifa Abdul Majid and
abolished the Khilafat. The third, period belongs to the 19th and 20th centuries in
which nationalism took the place of Pan-Islamism. In modern times, it was
championed by Jamal al-Din al Afghani (1839-1897) who sought unity among
Muslims to resist colonial occupation of Muslim lands. Instead of constitutional
government, he simply envisioned ‘the overthrow of individual rulers who were lax
147
or subservient to foreigners, and their replacement by strong and patriotic
men.’[For an informed debate read, Keddie, 1972: 225-26; Landau, 1990: 14;
wiki/Pan-Islamism; Aslam, 2012 ].
6. Anas, a teacher in the Ilahiya Arts and Science College in Muvattupuzha, was
alleged to have involved in the criminal case pertaining to the chopping off of the
hand of Prof. Joseph, a Teacher in the Newman’s College, Thodupuzha. The
incident took place in connection with the preparation of a question paper for
internal examination in that college. It was alleged that the question, prepared by
Prof. Joseph, contained some defamatory description about Prophet Muhammed
and this brought a strong protest from among a section of the Muslims. Following
this, a gang of Muslim youth reportedly associated with NDF, attacked him and
his right hand was chopped off.
7. Thouhid means ‘the Oneness of God’ and it is the very base of Islam. The Sunni
sects traditionally observe practices like offerings to the graves of saints, visiting
such places for blessings, invoking their intercession, etc. But Mujahid and Jamat-e-
Islami believe and propagate that such practices are against the spirit of Thouhid.
8. A.V.Abdurahman Haji and Mankada Abdul Aziz Moulavi were one time
Presidents of the Movement.
9. In 2002, there took place a vertical split in the organization with one group, calling
themselves, as the ‘KNM A.P.Faction’ led by T.P.Abdulla Koya Madani and
A.P.Abdul Khader Moulavi and the other group known as KNM (Madavoor
Faction) led by Umer Sullami and Dr.Hussain Madavoor (then leader of ISM,
youth wing of the KNM). Both political as well as philosophical grounds were
pointed out as important reasons for the split [wiki/Kerala_
Nadvathul_Mujahideen : 25.07.2010]. The "AP faction", now has T.P.Abdulla
Koya Madani as President and A.P.Abdul Qader Moulavi as General Secretary
and the "Madavoor faction" is led by Dr. E.K.Ahammad Kutty (President) and
C.P.Ummar Sullami (General Secretary).
10. Traditionally, after the death of the Prophet, Muslims in different parts of the
world largely follow any one among the prominent jurisprudences of Imams Abu
Hanif (Hanfi), Shafi, Hambal and Malik.
11. He was the first ‘amir’ and on his death (in October, 1959), K.C.Abdulla Moulavi
took over the chair.
12. It is the Board that supervises the educational activities of Jamat-e-Islami.
13. The organization was earlier known as the Ideal Students’ League (ISL), formed in
1970. However, it was banned in 1975. Also, at the national level, the Students
Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) formed in Aligarh was supposed as the student
wing of the Jamat-e-Islami, though it was labeled as an independent organization.
14. Though the name ‘Samastha Kerala Sunni Students Federation’ bears the term
‘Students Federation’, actually it does not represent any students union or
148
community, in a general sense. However, the organization itself believes in the
concept that its members remain as students in religious matters in perpetuity.
15. The Markaz is the only institution from Kerala having affiliation and academic
relations with Al Azhar University of Cairo in Egypt.
4. References
Ahamedkutty,E.K (1995), ‘The Mujahid Movement and its Role in the Islamic Revival in Kerala’, in Asghar Ali Engineer (ed.), Kerala Muslims : A Historical Perspective, Ajanta
Publications, Delhi.
,, (1997), Islamum Keralithile Saamuhya Parivarthana Prasthanangalum (M),
K.N.M.Publishing Wing, Kozhikode.
,, (2008), ‘Puthiya Lokhavum Punaralochanayum’ (M), Souvenir, Mujahid State
Conference, Wyanad.
allamaiqbal.com/publications/journals/review/oct92/2.htm, accessed on 05th November, 2012.
angelfire.com/sk/shoukath/salafimovement.html, accessed on 20th April, 2010.
Aslam, Shereen (1992), Pan-Islamism and Iqbal, www.allamaiqbal.com/oct92/2. htm: on 05th November, 2012.
Azeez, Dr. M. Abdul (1992), Rise of Muslims in Kerala Politics, CBH Publications,
Thiruvanathapuram.
Azharali, A (2008), ‘Mujahid Prasthanathil Sambhavichathu (M), Souvenir, Mujahid State Conference, Wynad.
Banu, C.P. Shareena (2006), ‘Influence of Gulf Migration on Identity Assertion Patterns: Denominational Contestation and the Emerging Public Sphere among Muslims of Kerala’, in Hasnain Nadeem (ed.), Islam and Muslim Communities in South Asia, Serial
Publications, New Delhi.
Bari, Parvez (2009), ‘SDPI gives clarion call to fight for freedom fro hunger & fear’. www.ummid.com/news/October/ accessed on 19th September, 2009.
Basheer, E.T.Muhammed (2011), Member of Lok Sabha, personal interview, 20th September.
Carnegy, P (1870), A Historical Sketch of Tehsil Fyzabad, Lucknow. ceokerala.gov.in, accessed on 18th May, 2011.
Elamarum, Nazaruddin (2011), President of SDPI, Kerala, personal interview, 5th August, Thiruvananthapuram.
Election Commission, ‘Statistical Reports of Kerala Legislative Assembly Elections, 1977-2006’,
ceokerala.gov.in, accessed on 18th May, 2011.
Ghosh, S.K (1987), Muslim Politics in India, Ashish Publishing House, New Delhi.
Gopakumar, Dr.G (1986), Regional Political Parties and State Politics, Deep and Deep
Publishers, New Delhi.
Government of Kerala, Assembly Election –Turnout, 2011, Election Department,
ceokerala.gov.in
149
Hameed, Cheriyamundam Abdul (2004), Islam: Prasthanangalum Darsanangalum (M),
Yuvatha Book House, Kozhikode.
indianmuslims.info/articles/yoginder_sikand/articles/news_forms_of_is, accessed on 23rd November, 2010.
,, /muslim-organizations-of-kerala, accessed on 15th February, 2009.
junction kerala.com, accessed on 25th July, 2010.
Kareem,T.K.Abdul (2010), General Secretary of MSS, personal interview, on 12th March, at the Headquarters, Kozhikode.
Keddie, Nikki R (1972), Sayyid Jamal ad-Din “al-Afghani”: A Political Biography: University
of California Press, Berkeley.
Khalidi, Omar (1996), Indian Muslims Since Independence, Vikas Publishing House, New
Delhi.
Khan, Maulana Wahiduddin (1994), Indian Muslims : The Need For A Positive Outlook (Translated by Dr.Farida Khanam), Al-Risala Books , New Delhi.
Kurup Dr.K.K.N and Prof.E. Ismail (2008), Emergence of Islam in Kerala in Twentieth
Century, Standard Publishers (India), New Delhi.
Landau, Jacob M (1990), The Politics of Pan-Islam: Ideology and Organization, Clarendon
Press, New York. Madhyamom Daily, 5th October, 2000.
Madhyamom Daily, 7th May, 2010.
Malayala Manorama Daily, 23rd January, 2011.
Mandalamkunnu, Sainudeen (2007), Kerala Muslim Navodhanam, Charithram, Varthamanaum, Vimarsanaum (M), Kaizen Books, Thrissur.
meskerala.com/mes-objectives.htm, accessed on 20th November, 2010.
MES (2011), Rules and Regulation of Muslim Educational Society, Kozhikode.
,, (2012), List of Major Institutions Run by MES, Kozhikode.
,, (2012), Office Details, MES, Kozhikode.
,, (2012), Programme of Work : 4(a), MES, Kozhikode.
Moulavi, A.P. Abdul Khader (2010), General Secretary, KNM, personal interview, 11th March, Kozhikode.
MSS (2010), Office Details, Muslim Service Society, Kozhikode.
Muhammed, Adv.K.P (2010), General Secretary of Jam’at Federation, personal interview,
24th September, Kollam.
Muhammed, P.A.Syed (ed.) (1960), Kerala Muslim Directory.
Nair K.N.and Vineetha Menon (ed.) (2007), Social Change in Kerala: Insight from Macro Level
Studies, Danish Books, Delhi.
Narain, Harsh (1993), The Ayodhya Temple-Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources,
Penman Publications, New Delhi.
Panicker, Sukumara. P (1976), The Muslim League in Kerala (Unpublished Ph.D Thesis),
University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram.
150
Popular Front of India (2011), ‘Saktheekaranathinte Samarapathayil’ (M), Popular Front of India, New Delhi.
Prakash P.K (2010), ‘CPM Vibhagiyathayun Muslimgalum’ (M), Madhyamom Daily,
Thiruvananthapuram, 05th January.
Radhakrishnan, R (2004), Muslims and Changing Political Trends in Kerala (Unpublished Ph’D Thesis), University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram.
Rahman, Mujeeb (2011), General Secretary, Jamat-e-Islami Kerala Circle, personal
interview 24th July, Kozhikode.
Ramanadhan (2010), Administrative Officer, MES Headquarters, Kozhikode, on 12th March, at MES Headquarters, Kozhikode.
rediff.com/news/1998/jun/13muslim.htm, accessed on 12.12.2010.
Salafi, Prof. Abdul Rahman (2010), Secretary of KNM and a scholar in KJU, personal interview, 04th July, Kollam.
samasthabahrain.com/institutions.html, accessed on 07.06.2010.
SDPI (2012), SDPI Bharanaghadana (Constitution), SDPI Kerala State Committee,
Thiruvanathapuram.
Sikand,Yoginder (2009), www.indianmuslims.info- svabhinava.org/ meccabenares/ Yoginder Sikand/SiddiqHassanKeralaJamaat.php: accessed on 20th December, 2009.
The New Indian Express Daily, 7th May, 1996 & 22nd October, 2009.
Times of India Daily , 8th November,2009.
twocirlces.net/2010oct28/ sdpi_marks_presence_winning_10_wards, accessed on 17th December, 2010.
ummid.com/news/October/19.10.2009/sdpi_gives_clarion_call_to_fight_hunger.htm. Retrieved 2009-08-04, accessed on 17th December, 2010.
wapedia.mobi/en/Solidarity_Youth_Movement,_Kerala, accessed on 23rd November, 2010.
Wikipedia.org/wiki/ accessed on various dates.
Yoginder Sikand, Kerala Jamaat. www.svabhinava.org/ meccabenares/ Yoginder Sikand/SiddiqHassanKeralaJamaat.php, accessed on 20th December, 2009.
Yoginder Sikand (2010), ‘New forms of Islamic educational provision in India’, Indian
Muslim News and Information, http://www.indianmuslims.info/articles, accessed on
23rd November, 2010.