Ajmal, who has a history of making controversial statements, made these remarks during an event addressing minority issues. He argued that the land originally belonged to the Waqf Board and had been unfairly taken over for national projects. He further stated that restitution of such properties is necessary to address long-standing grievances among the Muslim community. "We demand that the Parliament building and the Delhi airport land be handed back to the Waqf Board," Ajmal said. He argued that reclaiming these lands would ensure justice for the Muslim population, which he believes has been marginalized in property disputes over the years.
The BJP responded forcefully, with senior leaders labeling Ajmal’s remarks as inflammatory and factually incorrect. A spokesperson for the ruling party pointed out that the legal status of both the Parliament and the airport land has long been settled and that the claims made by Ajmal have no historical or legal basis. "This is an outright falsehood meant to create unrest. Both Parliament and the Delhi airport stand on government land, acquired following all legal procedures," said a senior BJP leader. The spokesperson accused Ajmal of using religious sentiments to divert attention from pressing issues in his constituency and to further his political agenda.
The issue of Waqf properties has long been a sensitive topic in India, often intersecting with broader debates about land rights and religious freedoms. The Waqf Board is a legal entity that manages properties donated for religious or charitable purposes by Muslims. Disputes over Waqf land have frequently led to legal battles, but Ajmal’s claim of Parliament and the airport being built on such land has been met with skepticism by historians and legal experts alike.
One legal expert emphasized that Ajmal’s statements appear to lack any documentary support. "To suggest that such prominent national structures like the Parliament and Delhi airport are built on Waqf land is a serious claim, but there has been no evidence provided. Land records for these locations have been thoroughly examined, and nothing indicates that they were ever Waqf properties," said the expert. Other analysts suggest that Ajmal’s remarks may be a calculated move to galvanize support from his core voter base by highlighting issues of alleged land appropriation.
While Ajmal’s call for the return of these properties has garnered attention, it has also raised concerns about how such rhetoric might influence the political climate. Several political commentators have cautioned that these types of claims can fuel divisive narratives at a time when religious and communal tensions are already high in parts of the country. The BJP, which prides itself on promoting national unity, has expressed concern that Ajmal’s comments could deepen societal rifts.
Delhi’s Parliament building, an iconic structure completed in 1927, has long been a symbol of India’s democratic values. Its construction predated the country’s independence, and the land on which it was built was acquired under British rule. Similarly, the Indira Gandhi International Airport, which serves as the nation’s busiest aviation hub, was developed on land acquired by the government through a process that has not been linked to any Waqf claims. Both sites are considered central to India’s infrastructure and national identity.
Ajmal’s AIUDF has traditionally positioned itself as a defender of minority rights, and his claims about Waqf property ownership fit within a broader political narrative the party has pursued. However, political observers have noted that such assertions are unlikely to result in tangible action or policy change. "Ajmal’s statements may resonate with his political base, but legally, they stand on shaky ground. Waqf land disputes are real, but linking these sites to Waqf ownership doesn’t hold up under scrutiny," said one political analyst.
Opposition parties, while cautious about commenting directly on Ajmal’s claims, have expressed concern that such debates detract from more pressing governance issues. Some opposition leaders suggested that focusing on matters like unemployment, education, and infrastructure development would be more productive. "Raising these kinds of issues might get headlines, but it doesn’t solve the core challenges faced by people on the ground," one opposition leader remarked.
As the controversy unfolds, it remains to be seen how Ajmal’s claims will play out in the broader political arena. With general elections approaching, political discourse is likely to intensify, and such statements could either mobilize support or backfire. Ajmal’s focus on Waqf land fits into a larger narrative of religious rights, but it may also invite further scrutiny of his political motivations.