Kiren Rijiju, the Union Minister for Parliamentary Affairs and Minority Affairs, has accused West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee of fostering violence in the state over her stance on the Waqf (Amendment) Act. Rijiju noted that while Banerjee may have disagreements with the BJP and the central government, she cannot declare that a specific law will not be enforced in the state. In an interview with the news agency ANI, Rijiju asserted that Banerjee disregarding a law passed by Parliament is a slight against the constitution and sends a perilous message.
He elaborated, 'The actions of West Bengal's Chief Minister and some political parties will have profound adverse effects, not only regarding the establishment of the rule of law but also in terms of constitutional relevance. Law and order is a state subject. Now, in West Bengal, the chief minister herself is stating that she will not acknowledge this law for its enforcement in the state. This defiance of constitutional spirit can be viewed as an attempt to incite the public.' Reflecting on the recent incidents in Murshidabad and other parts of Bengal, Rijiju argued that the violence was a direct consequence of political rhetoric.
Kiren Rijiju added, 'The violence in Murshidabad and other regions of West Bengal, as well as isolated events elsewhere, is a result of reckless political statements made by Mamata Banerjee and some other leaders, which are condemnable. It baffles me that she is undermining her own position despite holding such a high office. Who will halt the violence in West Bengal? Maintaining law and order is the responsibility of the state government. The individual tasked with enforcing law and order is instead promoting violent events, causing the loss of innocent lives.'
When asked why he believes Mamata Banerjee is advocating for violence, Rijiju responded, 'Isn't she publicly declaring her non-acceptance of the Waqf law? We must grasp one point, in a democracy, a law passed by Parliament might not achieve 100% support within the house, as the house consists of representatives from all states and union territories. The majority of members unite to formulate laws. Now, when members establish a law, it becomes a law of the Parliament, translating to a law of the nation. How can the CM of Bengal announce her refusal to implement this law in her state? This proclamation is a dubious and perilous stance.'
