Beyond Protection: A Review of Muslim Political Agency in India

The paper by Nizamuddin Ahmad Siddiqui and Saqib Rasool offers an important contribution to our understanding of Muslim politics in contemporary India. Published in the Manchester Journal of Transnational Islamic Law & Practice in 2025, it examines Sharjeel Imam’s political ideas, his writings, and his vision for the future of Indian Muslims.

The paper is particularly significant because the authors move beyond the public debate surrounding Imam’s speeches and examine the larger political ideas behind his writings. They explore questions of citizenship, political representation, religious identity, democracy, and constitutionalism.

For me, the most important contribution of this paper is that it encourages us to ask a fundamental question: Is the protection of religious and personal laws sufficient for a minority community, or must that community also possess meaningful political power to shape the institutions governing its life?

I would like to highlight five important themes emerging from this paper.

Personal Law or Political Autonomy?

The first important question concerns the relationship between the protection of personal law and political autonomy.

The paper presents Imam’s argument that sections of the Muslim leadership, particularly its political and religious leadership, have historically prioritised the protection of personal laws and religious institutions without giving equal attention to political representation.

This raises an important question: What is the purpose of protecting personal law if a community lacks sufficient political influence to participate in decisions affecting its rights, education, employment, economic opportunities, and citizenship?

Personal law remains an important dimension of religious freedom and community identity. However, political autonomy concerns something broader. It concerns the ability of a community to participate in making the laws and policies that govern it.

The paper therefore encourages us to look beyond the immediate protection of religious institutions and examine the structural position of Muslims within Indian democracy.

It also raises a question for religious scholars, or ulema: Should their public engagement remain concentrated on personal law, religious institutions, and matters such as the Waqf, or should it also include political representation, educational development, economic justice, and democratic participation?

The larger lesson is that protecting personal law and pursuing political representation need not be competing objectives. The challenge is to ensure that the protection of religious identity does not replace the broader pursuit of equal citizenship and political agency.

Can Proportional Representation Strengthen Muslim Political Agency?

The second important theme is electoral representation.

Imam questions the First-Past-the-Post system, under which the candidate receiving the highest number of votes in a constituency wins the election. He argues that this system can leave minority communities politically underrepresented, particularly when their votes are spread across constituencies or when they lack the numbers to determine electoral outcomes.

As an alternative, he advocates proportional representation, under which seats are allocated more closely in accordance with the votes received by parties or candidates, depending on the electoral model adopted.

This argument is significant because it shifts the discussion from the mere right to vote to the ability to secure meaningful representation.

For instance, a community may constitute a substantial proportion of the national population but still have limited representation in elected institutions. The question, therefore, is whether electoral outcomes adequately reflect the diversity of the electorate.

Proportional representation could offer one possible solution by enabling smaller political groups to obtain seats corresponding more closely to their electoral support.

However, it is important to understand that proportional representation is not a complete solution by itself. Its effectiveness would depend on the particular electoral model, the design of constituencies or party lists, internal democratic practices, and the protection of the rights of all communities.

Nevertheless, the paper makes us reconsider whether the existing electoral system adequately serves the objectives of representative democracy.

The broader insight is that democracy should not be measured only by the conduct of elections, but also by the extent to which different sections of society can meaningfully participate in political decision-making.

Nationalism, Secularism and Composite Nationalism

The third theme concerns Imam’s critique of nationalism and secularism.

Imam questions the idea that Muslims must repeatedly demonstrate their national belonging while their concerns about discrimination, political representation, and religious identity remain inadequately addressed.

He also questions whether secularism, despite being an important constitutional ideal, can become merely a political slogan if it does not translate into substantive equality.

This argument leads to a further question: Can composite nationalism provide an alternative framework for belonging?

Composite nationalism, or muttahida qaumiyat, rests on the possibility that people belonging to different religious communities can constitute a common political nation without surrendering their distinct identities.

In this understanding, national unity does not require cultural or religious uniformity. Muslims can participate in the Indian republic while retaining their religious identity and pursuing their political interests.

The paper also draws attention to the relationship between Imam’s ideas and those of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, particularly their shared concern with Hindu-Muslim coexistence, although their approaches to political representation and community autonomy differ.

For me, the central lesson is that composite nationalism must be understood as more than a statement of unity. It must also provide space for equality, dignity, disagreement, and meaningful participation.

Similarly, secularism becomes more meaningful when it is reflected in the actual treatment of religious communities rather than remaining confined to political language.

The paper therefore invites us to consider whether national belonging and minority political agency can reinforce each other instead of being treated as opposing objectives.

The Constitution and Constitutionalism

The fourth theme is perhaps the most intellectually significant: the distinction between the Constitution and constitutionalism.

The Constitution is the formal legal document containing the institutional framework, rights, and principles governing the country. Constitutionalism, on the other hand, concerns the effective limitation of power, protection of rights, respect for democratic institutions, and commitment to constitutional values.

The paper examines Imam’s argument that the existence of a written Constitution does not automatically guarantee equality or prevent political marginalisation.

He argues that the Constitution must be understood in light of its practical operation and the experiences of communities living under it. At the same time, he invokes the spirit of the Constitution, particularly its commitments to equality, liberty, justice, and fraternity.

This distinction is important because constitutional democracy requires more than the formal existence of legal provisions. It requires institutions and political actors to respect the principles underlying those provisions.

The authors further interpret Imam’s ideas through the framework of decolonial constitutionalism. This approach explores how subordinated communities can seek recognition, political agency, and protection of their rights through legitimate and non-violent engagement with existing constitutional structures.

The significance of this approach lies in its attempt to reconcile demands for substantial political change with continued engagement in the constitutional order.

It encourages us to ask whether the Constitution should be treated as a fixed historical document or as a framework whose democratic promise must be continually realised through interpretation, political participation, and institutional reform.

The paper ultimately reminds us that constitutionalism becomes meaningful when constitutional values are experienced in the everyday lives of citizens.

The Possibilities and Challenges of Imam’s Political Vision

The fifth theme concerns the practical possibilities of Imam’s proposed political framework.

The authors highlight his emphasis on political mobilisation, proportional representation, decentralisation, historical awareness, and the participation of educated Muslim youth.

They also examine his call for alliances between Muslims and other marginalised groups, including oppressed castes. This is significant because it places Muslim political agency within the broader pursuit of social justice.

At the same time, the paper acknowledges that questions remain about how such alliances would operate in practice, how different political interests would be reconciled, and how movements could translate their demands into institutional change.

These questions make the paper particularly valuable. It does not merely present an alternative political vision; it also invites readers to examine the practical challenges involved in realising it.

The broader lesson is that political agency requires both ideas and institutions. Social movements can articulate demands and create public awareness, while electoral participation, legal reform, and sustained organisation may help translate those demands into lasting political outcomes.

Key Takeaways from Paper

To conclude, this paper is valuable because it encourages us to examine Muslim politics in India through a broader framework than religious identity or electoral participation alone.

Its central contribution lies in connecting five important questions: the relationship between personal law and political autonomy, the possibilities of proportional representation, the meaning of composite nationalism, the practical limitations of secularism, and the distinction between the Constitution and constitutionalism.

The paper also reminds us that minority rights cannot be understood solely through the protection of religious practices. They must also be examined through the ability of minority communities to participate in political institutions, influence public policy, and enjoy equal citizenship.

For me, the most important takeaway is this: The objective of democratic inclusion should not merely be to protect minorities within the existing political system, but to ensure that they possess a meaningful voice in shaping that system.

Ultimately, the paper invites us to reflect on a larger question concerning Indian democracy: How can a diverse society preserve its unity while ensuring that no community is required to surrender its identity, dignity, or political agency in order to belong?

That is the question that makes this paper worth reading and discussing.